by Selwyn Duke
If you're the average person living in these modern times, you believe that what we've come to call "self-esteem" is a positive thing. After all, the idea that self-esteem is a necessary ingredient of success is taken as gospel now. We're told that it has a bearing on children's academic achievement and social adjustment; on their likelihood of getting involved in crime, sex or drugs; on later career success and virtually everything else under the sun. This exaltation of self-esteem is a quite recent phenomenon - the idea only gained widespread acceptance about a decade ago. But, did you ever stop and think what the notion that it's important is based on? Did you ever question the validity of self-esteem theory? I know, it's a no-brainer and I'm guilty of modern day heresy for questioning it. But bear with me, because I don't dispute the claim that self-esteem is significant; no, it sure is significant, because the inculcation of it in children is the surest way to poison their souls, to stunt their moral, spiritual and intellectual growth.
Giving Birth to a Social Cause Monster
Current self-esteem theory originated about fifteen years ago, when psychologists sought to explain why boys started surpassing girls in academic achievement during adolescence [this itself was untrue, which means the impetus behind the idea was a falsehood, but I won't address that further here]. So, these paragons of intellectual thought conjured up the hypothesis that girls fell behind because this wicked, patriarchal society was damaging their self-esteem by way of prejudices that caused people to treat girls differently. Of course, this idea made perfect sense to many people; after all, it's completely in accordance with the "men are oppressors, women are the oppressed" spirit of our age. These psychologists then sought to put their hypothesis to the test, but it was a test that couldn't be failed because the teachers had a student they were going to pass come Hell or high water.
Spinning Data
So, what have come to be known as self-esteem exams were created and then administered to the guinea pigs some people still call children. And, lo and behold, the boys did in fact score higher than the girls. Well, this was all the evidence the Dr. Frankensteins of self-esteem needed to justify the loosing of their monster of social policy reforms among the population. The pieces fit: ostensibly, boys did better academically, and they scored higher on the self-esteem exams - slam dunk, right? Well, the problem was that there was one major flaw in the psychologists' analysis of the data. You see, they completely glossed over the fact that the group that scored HIGHEST on the self-esteem exams performed the WORST academically, and this group was black males. You can't let the facts get in the way of a cherished agenda though, even if it means you have to peddle bad science. Consequently, this aspect of the research was played down by the scientists.
However, it's not as if there hasn't been honest research in this area. In fact, in the 1980's the California Task Force to Promote Self-Esteem analyzed thousands of studies on the subject and concluded that "There is little or no correlation between high self-esteem and a reduction in teen pregnancy, drug use, violence in schools." In the early 1990's, researchers sought to determine how self-esteem influenced academic performance. So, they asked students to agree or disagree with the following statement: I am good at mathematics. Well, guess what: they found out that not only was high self-esteem not a predictor of achievement, but that it actually was a predictor of failure! Yes, students in Washington D.C. thought the most of their mathematical ability but were the worst at math. Whereas students in North Dakota thought the least of their ability but ranked number one in math. Why haven't we heard about this? It's very simple: as usual, the mainstream media have been derelict in their duty to report the Truth because they are in the pocket of the radical, politically-correct left - and nothing is more politically-correct than the promotion of self-esteem nonsense.
Destroying Character
Now, an astute reader should be confused at this point. He might say, "Look, I can see why high self-esteem might not enhance performance, but why should it detract from it? I mean, having self-esteem is a good thing, isn't it?" Well, this is why I said in the first paragraph "what we've come to call self-esteem." The phrase "self-esteem" sounds great, but terms and phrases are often deceptive, and when something sounds great but yields poor fruit you have to see a red flag. You see, "self-esteem" has become a euphemism for PRIDE, and pride is one of the seven deadly sins. This explains why black kids score the highest on self-esteem exams but do the worst academically - these fraudulent tests simply measure how "bad" you think you are. As for boys, most all of us understand that boys tend to be cockier than girls, so it's no surprise that they score higher either.
It should be clear now that the self-esteem movement is completely without merit, but I hope you understand the gravity of what I've told you. Because we have kowtowed to know-nothing psycho-babblers, we are actually instilling in our children what is a grievous character flaw and a sin - pride. This flies in the face of what thousands of years of human experience have taught us, which is that you shouldn't seek to engender pride in people, you should seek to engender humility. This is because as the above research has demonstrated, as we become more prideful as a people we will become more incompetent and ignorant. The reason for this is that a proud person is blind to his own faults - he is too proud to accept the fact that he has shortcomings so he refuses to acknowledge them. And, of course, the first step toward solving a problem is the acknowledgement that it exists. After all, you won't work to improve if you don't realize there's something that needs improving. To thine own self be true; this is something a proud person can never be, and proud people are what policies aimed at buttressing self-esteem transform our children into.
One of the greatest examples of the devastation that can be wrought by pride is the progenitors of self-esteem theory themselves. These are people whose egos just won't allow them to see the error of their ways, and over their dead bodies will they ever admit they've been wrong. Their agenda is their god and they'd rather sacrifice millions of children on its altar rather than confess their mistake. This reminds me of something my father once taught me: pride goeth before the fall.
