Why Students Cheat

Mike Hanski quoted me in his article “Why Students Cheat: 10 Reasons Some Teachers Ignore.”

Academic plagiarism is the Achilles heel of most educators, and the “why students cheat” question haunts them throughout the work process. They try hard to develop students’ critical thinking and writing skills, but mentees continue to attempt to copy texts and ideas from others, claiming them as their own. It’s like a slap in your face or a kick in your…well, any part of your body, isn’t it? Despite the devastating consequences of academic dishonesty and strong policies against it in most institutions, students don’t realize the problem.

Numbers speak volumes

Back in 2017, Kessler International revealed smashing numbers: 76% of students copied someone else’s assignments, 54% indicated that cheating is necessary to stay competitive, and 42% said they purchased papers from custom writing services. That ugly feeling of betrayal nibbles when you check mentees’ works and disclose their plagiarism, doesn’t it? Some reasons for plagiarism may not be as obvious as they seem, preventing teachers from thinking about efficient techniques that could help solve the problem.

Why students cheat

Are they too lazy to spend time on assignments? Are they poor writers or time managers? Or maybe they don’t know much about the topic you assign? Plagiarism causes and solutions vary, and they may depend on the type of plagiarism (whether it’s self plagiarism, accidental plagiarism, or intentional plagiarism). Unveil them now to understand how to work with students so they wouldn’t even think of academic dishonesty.

So, why do students plagiarize?

1 – Fear of failure

A core reason for procrastination, fear of failure affects student motivation. It appears when students dread to disappoint expectations or aren’t sure of their writing skills and topic knowledge.

“Their words are better,” they think.

“To get high grades, I need someone to write an essay for me,” they suppose.

“I can’t lose my status.” They tremble and go online to plagiarize from available publications there.

Scientists have examined the issue to see how this fear influences student behavior. Published in the British Journal of Educational Psychology, the results raise eyebrows; fear of failure determines the methods your mentees choose to reach their learning goals. In particular, they adopt learning as a way to stroke their own egos. So, they don’t study to master the material but to prove their superiority to others. With such motivation, it’s clear these students are more likely to cheat.

2 – Lack of interest

For some teachers, it’s hard to suspect students of disinterest in their subjects. But let’s face it — while educational technology helps students improve the learning process today, some of them simply don’t care about the topic you assign. They don’t think it’s worth their time and energy, so they choose academic dishonesty to complete it quickly and get back to what they do like.

3 – Pressure

“Many students plagiarize because the academic load and requirements are too heavy for them. Since they need to submit many requirements over short periods, many of them end up plagiarizing to make writing a lot faster and so they can beat the deadline.” -Craig Miller, academician at Academia Labs

Enormous pressure from teachers and parents to complete assignments, compete for scholarships, and eventually place in the job market turns the education process into a turf battle with a focus on results rather than acquired knowledge and skills. Dr. Alex Trevatt, director at Medistudents confirms, “The most common reason we see is external pressure to achieve a particular grade (usually by parents), combined with a lack of confidence in their ability to achieve the grade. Often, if these students had received more support earlier in their studies, they would have had the confidence to produce original work. Learning institutes can tackle this reason for plagiarism by providing more personalized tuition, although this is logistically harder and more expensive, and so it is often neglected.”

And here goes a paradox: the more intelligent your student is, the more pressure they feel. High expectations and unreasonable demands lead students to impostor syndrome and a desire to be the best in everything they do. Feeling like they are stuck trying to handle that pressure, students plagiarize to manage it. Plagiarism appears to be one way to complete all tasks on time, prove competence, and win some time for a recharge.

4 – Hubris

Here’s something we can agree on: the ego of some students is so high that they think no one will catch them red-handed and they are above any consequences. Cynical about grades, they see nothing wrong with plagiarism. The story is as old as Adam: back in 2002, CNN Online revealed some students’ view on cheating where they argued that they were “almost completely judged on grades” and “a person who had an entirely honest life couldn’t succeed.” Hubris itself is not a reason why students plagiarize, but it explains why they continue doing it over and over again.

5 – Thrill

Do you know that we all have a subconscious desire to steal from others? The mirror neuron system of the human brain makes us copy gestures and deeds because we feel happy doing that. And yes, the fear of penalty can’t help to stop it. Evolutionary psychologists call this behavior “a social glue” facilitating connections and interpersonal bonding. When copying others, we feel social participation and trigger happy chemicals in the brain to satisfy our need for excitement.

Dopamine rules when a person expects a reward. (Read: high grades)

Serotonin makes us feel significant. (Read: recognition from a teacher and peers)

Oxytocin takes the stage when we feel trust. (Read: escaping accusations of plagiarism)

Endorphins give a moment of pleasure as a survival mechanism. (Read: completing the assignment successfully)

For some students, plagiarism is a kind of thrill. It’s a challenge to cheat a professor, escape punishment, and therefore, feed their happy chemicals.

6 – Panic

Another reason for plagiarism among students is panic when they feel backed into a corner with strict deadlines. It doesn’t necessarily relate to laziness or poor time management; such a panic may appear when a student is new to the type of work assigned. When you do something for the first time, it’s hard to assume how much time and energy the task requires, and it’s challenging to organize yourself the proper way.

“More often than not, plagiarism is the result of desperation; perhaps the student didn’t understand the assignment or ran out of time to complete it. Because of our education system’s emphasis on grades as a measure of success, some students would rather plagiarize than receive a low score on an assignment.” -Lynn Wolfe, adjunct professor of English at California Baptist University

7 – Misunderstanding the point of learning

Chances are that a student doesn’t understand the idea behind the learning process. They assume that everything they need to do is reproduce what others (experts) have already said. Not only can’t such students cite sources, but they believe there’s no need to do this. For them, scholarly publications are just places to go and find facts, like dictionaries where they look up definitions or correct spellings.

“I thought I could use only the words of experts,” they explain when a teacher asks why they didn’t share their own experience or express their own opinion on the topic. They assume that learning is about collecting ideas from others and summarizing/plagiarizing them to remember. Katherine Williams, a TEFL certified ESL teacher from VerbNow adds, “Most students are unaware they must attribute internet content appropriately and that it constitutes the author’s intellectual property. They don’t understand the need for referencing since they believe that material obtained from the internet is already common knowledge. The same factor contributes to the frequent improper citation of articles from internet sources.”

8 – Sloppiness

This one is about accurate note-taking. During research, some students can be sloppy and then confused about what they copied from the source and what they wrote themselves. Later, while writing, they don’t remember whose words they were; all sources get muddled on paper and in their minds. They rely on notes they believe were their own words. To prevent that, teachers can educate students about efficient strategies for organizing notes. Also, insist that your mentees include citations in drafts. Yep, they say they’ll do it later, but as we all know, they later forget where they go.

9 – Competition

As we know, some institutions practice grade curving, which means teachers grade students by percentile. For example, they say the top 15% get an A, 35% get a B, the other 35% get a C, and the rest of the 15% share D and F. What does a class of 100 students get as a result? The A grade becomes available for 15 people only, which triggers competition with peers for grades.

Such a system ranks students against each other, regardless of actual learning. Craving higher grades, they choose to cheat to improve their work and jump into the A or B wagon. More than that, A students won’t help their peers understand the material, and those peers won’t ask for help but rather go and plagiarize, creating even more pressure. Criterion referenced grading would help eliminate competition as a stressor and reduce cheating.

10 – Feeling anonymous

The classroom is a social context, and social relationships shape behavior. When a student doesn’t have a friendly professional relationship with a teacher and classmates, they feel anonymous and are more likely to cheat. Here’s how it works:

Students who feel valued in class are less likely to cheat because the social costs are high; they don’t want to ruin their reputation or experience emotions of shame and embarrassment.

Students who feel anonymous aren’t subject to these costs; the teacher doesn’t even know or notice them, so they are more likely to cheat, with no worries about the consequences.

To prevent such situations, it would help to learn and use students’ names and, if time allows, organize some time to talk to them; it will create a comfortable atmosphere and help students see that they get noticed.

Reasons why you should not plagiarize: unobvious consequences

Why is plagiarism bad? The ugly truth is most students know the answer but still cheat even at the risk of expulsion. It’s only the most obvious consequence of plagiarism students are afraid of: being caught red-handed and expelled from college.

They hardly size up the problem at full breadth; the effects of such an action are way worse, and it would help if teachers revealed and explained them to mentees. We asked educators to share the unobvious consequences of plagiarism for students to understand. This is what we’ve got.

1 – Reputation loss

“When cheating, a student gets a bad reputation because this behavior tends to be portrayed in different subject areas. Teachers discuss students’ work from time to time, and at this point, habitual cheaters are highlighted. We tend to be somewhat lenient with mentees who plagiarize mistakenly, but habitually plagiarizing in multiple subject areas can hardly be an excuse.” -Camile Clarke, geography teacher

2 – Health problems

“By submitting plagiarized work for review, you can raise expectations that you can’t meet. Your immune system will be weaker from either the fear of getting caught, the stress of guilt, or both. Plus, if one day, long after college is over, you’ll need a security clearance, guess what will crop up?” -David C. Berliner, Professor of Education Emeritus at Arizona State University

3 – Career failures

“An obvious consequence would be the penalties, but cheating, especially if it becomes habitual, can have impacts beyond student life. Students who study medicine, engineering, architecture, law, and other industries need highly specialized skills and knowledge to practice in their respective fields. If they get by in school with cheating and plagiarism, they might make decisions and perform procedures that endanger the public.” -Andre Teixeira, founder of Lusa Language School

4 – Inability to think critically and solve problems

“If you cheat, you are essentially sending yourself the message that you are willing to take shortcuts at the expense of doing a full job. How will that attitude show up and negatively impact your relationships, your health, and your job in the future? When students plagiarize, they deprive themselves of the ability to think critically, solve problems independently, and articulately express themselves. It will end up costing them job opportunities, promotions, and chances at success down the line because when the time comes to perform and there is nobody around to plagiarize, then what will they do?” -Greg Freebury, founder of Think & Evolve Academy

5 – Distrust between teachers and students

“The least obvious consequence is the broken trust between the teacher and the students. When an educator assigns an essay, they place faith in mentees and trust they will work diligently. Students who cheat break that bond and foster suspicion and doubt in the teacher. Broken trust is hard to fix, and the feelings of betrayal can be persistent.” -David Moadel, professor of English

6 – Lack of skills to argue and defend ideas

“A student fails to grow their mind regarding the subject because they don’t get to grapple with the ideas or concepts that, if done right, would produce independent and original thought. Plagiarism shows that students don’t value their thinking. By cheating, they don’t learn to articulate, explore, and defend their own ideas.” -Meredith Granger, teacher with the Ministry of Education

7 – Low self-esteem

“Getting away with cheating teaches you that your own creativity and ingenuity are worthless. It teaches you to get ahead by cutting corners and stealing credit from others, corrodes your own sense of self worth, and trains you to pay lip service to the promises you make and the obligations you take on. It rewards you for selling yourself short. And in the long run, it teaches you to distrust the people around you at work, school, and home.” -Mike S. Wills, assistant professor

8 – Theft

“Although typically viewed as academically dishonest, plagiarism at the cash register is nothing else but an economic crime. A book lifted from one author and sold as another’s is a form of monetary theft. It steals from the true author so that the plagiarizer can make an easy dollar.” -Chad Morris, English teacher

9 – A weakened educational community

“By copying others’ arguments, cheaters fail to put forward their own views on issues. Their personal perspectives are lost, which means their contribution to the academic debate is lost. As a result, well constructed and original positions don’t take place, leading to a narrowing of academic opinion and, as a whole, a weakened educational community.” -Rosemary Edmonds, educational consultant

10 – Deterioration of the mind and wisdom

“The most unobvious consequence of plagiarism is long-term: it’s the distortion of morals and deterioration of the human spirit, mind, and wisdom. We need to get inspired by the knowledge of other people to personify the universal mind in our souls. If not inspired but only ready to use others’ knowledge, pretending it is our own, it means corruption, no development, and a decrease in progress sooner or later.” -Ana Markovic, English teacher and translator

How to minimize student plagiarism at your institution

Is there anything teachers can do to prevent academic dishonesty?

-Teach interpretation and analysis to students; explain how to process the information they find in sources.

-Ensure your students understand why they need to cite sources.

-To make them feel comfortable with writing, tell them about the importance of personal writing style and tone of voice. Explain that you want to see how well they understand the topic rather than gobbledygook of sources they used for research.

-Teach them to state a thesis before they begin researching. Encourage them to outline essays and insist that they include citations in the drafts.

-Debunk the myth of grades’ high importance for future success. Explain that A’s don’t matter if a student doesn’t have the skills to show for them.

-Divide assignments into parts: have students submit outlines or bibliographies before final drafts for better planning and time management. It will help to make tasks less overwhelming for your mentees.

-Teach them how to cite sources properly to avoid unintentional plagiarism.

-Allow students to choose topics and use real life anecdotes in their essays to enhance their interest in writing.

-Explain the difference between plagiarism and paraphrasing. Teach the necessary components of paraphrasing and explain how to use them right.

-Unveil all, including the most unobvious consequences of plagiarism for your students to realize the problem.

-Help students learn how to organize their work, especially if the task is complex and they are novices. Explain by modeling what they should do.

-Always discuss why the assignment is critical in the context of the class and overall learning. Students need to know what knowledge and skills they’ll gain from doing this task.

-Show them examples with uncited summaries and ask them to identify and correct the problem.

Reasons why students cheat are many, and yet none make this issue acceptable.

For students: tips to reduce plagiarism in academic papers

-Learn where and how to place citations and format them correctly.

-Pay precise attention to research, combine different types of sources, and do your best to include alternate opinions on the topic. Say no to citing Wikipedia!

-Embrace academic integrity and learn to be responsible for your deeds in college. If you need help with writing assignments, there are tons of free and legal resources online to get it: social media groups share tips, writing forums assist with research, online libraries and Q&A websites help with resources, etc.

The good news is you can handle it!

Vocal Fry: The Linguistic Trend That Just Won’t Die

There is a speech habit permeating the English language which has become so prevalent that those who claim not to notice must be selectively deaf. Like its predecessors upspeak and Valley Girl talk, this linguistic trend is most common among young females. The formal name of the phenomenon is vocal fry.

This worldwide linguistic epidemic originated with celebrities, namely the Kardashians. Young women may imitate their vocal style in order to appear hip and sexy. However, for many listeners it has the opposite effect, making those who use vocal fry sound immature, insecure, and unprofessional.

For those who still don’t know what I mean, this is what I mean.

Vocal fry is a growling sound, most often used to punctuate the end of sentences. Speech therapists refer to it as glottal fry. The glottis is the space between the vocal folds, which is meant to be used for producing clear sounds. Purposely vibrating the glottis, however, produces a creaky noise similar to the one that the ghost makes in The Grudge.

Like, totallyyyyyyy…

Kim Kardashian and Katy Perry are typically cited as prime examples of celebrities who speak like this, though so does almost every other female celebrity under the age of 50. Ever since this vocal tic has taken the world by storm, the term “glottal fry” has mostly been replaced by “vocal fry” in the popular vernacular. The reason for this shift might be because glottal fry is considered a speech disorder, while vocal fry is a linguistic trend. Though the mechanism that produces the sound is the same — a vibrating glottis — the difference is that vocal fry is done on purpose.

While some people don’t seem to notice, others liken the sound to nails on a chalkboard. Perhaps this irritation arises from a natural aversion to people with scratchy voices, as vocal fry sounds similar to a voice afflicted with a contagious respiratory disease (sorry, not sexy). When the trend peaked around 2015, vocal coaches were advising young women to stop damaging their vocal cords and career prospects.

Yet apparently the habit is difficult to break, because the trend persists to this day. When confronted by irritated family members to just stop, many women claim they didn’t notice they were using vocal fry, or that their voices have always been like that (even if their families recall otherwise). Others interpret the criticism as a misogynistic attack. This argument doesn’t hold water, though, as many men have also picked up the habit — and it’s just as annoying when they do it. What hardly anyone admits to is affecting vocal fry on purpose, though that is clearly what’s happening.

A 2014 study published in Plos One states, “Vocal fry can be associated with a speech pathology or produced voluntarily as a vocal affectation. Recent research has noted a high proportion of young adult females in the United States using vocal fry, particularly when vocalizing words occurring at the end of utterances.” The authors also found that, indeed, people tend to react negatively to vocal fry. So, why persist in the habit?

The aforementioned study suggests women are attempting to sound more masculine by using their lowest voice register, as part of a complex power play involving gender dynamics in the postmodern workplace. However, I offer three other reasons that are perhaps more simpleminded, though I believe more plausible:

1. They are attempting to imitate celebrities they admire.
2. Their peers use vocal fry, and they want to fit in.
3. They subconsciously pick up the speech pattern after hearing vocal fry in the media and among other women.

Those who admit to vocal frying typically claim something along the lines of the last reason, though in my view that one is the least convincing of the three. After all, we can hear our own voices; we notice changes due to bronchitis or strep throat, for example. Why wouldn’t someone notice if she suddenly started growling at the end of sentences?

Regardless of the motive, there are compelling reasons to stop. First, it may in fact damage the vocal cords over time. Using a creaky voice even for one day can cause throat pain, and prolonged vocal frying may lead to more serious issues such as vocal cord polyps.

Dr. Morton Cooper, a speech therapist and celebrity voice coach, noted the connection between affected voice habits and vocal cord damage in his 1996 book Stop Committing Voice Suicide. He writes, “For various reasons, we become sold on certain voice images….I call them ‘situation voices.’ A ‘put-on’ sexy voice, for example, is more attractive than a natural voice to some people.”

He adds, “Many people play out various social roles by voice alteration or put-ons.” According to Dr. Cooper, affected voices are common. Many of us cringe when hearing ourselves speak (such as on an answering machine), and this compels some people to alter their voices so that they sound more “ideal.” Vocal fry currently seems to be the ideal “sexy voice” in English-speaking countries. (There are also slight variations, such as Miley Cyrus’s “faux hoarse” for those who prefer to project a cool, disinterested image.)

Cooper treats vocal fry as a speech disorder, even if the person wasn’t born speaking that way. He writes, “Millions of Americans are misusing their voices playing a disastrous game I call voice suicide. It results from long-term misuse…and can lead to very serious voice damage.”

There are also negative social consequences. A Time article noted that vocal fry, along with other trends such as upspeak, nasal tones, and breathy voices are irritating to employers. Speaking in “the vibrating, world-weary tone heard throughout popular culture — from the droning conversations of the Kardashian sisters to the red carpet quips delivered by America’s favorite quirky girl Zoey Deschanel” harms young women’s chances of being hired, the author concludes.

What is the solution? Quite simply, do away with all vocal affectations and speak in your natural, God-given voice. Everyone’s ears will be thankful.

We Have a Problem, But It’s Not Systemic Racism

On July 5, 2011, police officers in Fullerton, California beat a 37-year-old schizophrenic man to death as he cried for his “daddy” repeatedly. He hadn’t committed a crime or done anything at all to provoke the attack. Yet despite being described as one of the worst police beatings in US history, none of the officers was charged with the murder of Kelly Thomas.

This incident is similar to the George Floyd event that occurred last year, which gained much more publicity and sparked an aggressive antiracist movement. Since then, it has become fashionable for politicians and celebrities to accuse each other of racism over actions that, while obnoxious, actually have nothing to do with racial discrimination. But Kelly Thomas and the officers who killed him were all white men — which reveals that racism is not the real issue here.  Police brutality — and the abuse of power in general — applies to people of all races.

With the recent fixation on systemic racism, schools have been pressured to teach critical race theory, and this is causing more harm than good. For instance, a course survey I took after completing a class at California State University, Fullerton prompted me to rate my instructor’s effectiveness in convicting me of my own privileged status. It struck me as inappropriate; I attended school to be educated, not indoctrinated. Besides, I grew up with a single mother who lived paycheck to paycheck — hardly a privileged demographic. People around the country with similar sentiments have been fiercely protesting the teaching of critical race theory in schools. Some states have even banned it from the curriculum — but the culture war rages on.

Corporations have jumped on the antiracist bandwagon as well, slapping up statements on their websites that pander to the movement. One can’t even buy ice cream from Ben & Jerry’s without being subjected to a lecture about the evils of systemic racism. It’s just absurd.

Now, I understand that racist attitudes still exist today among a minority, but America simply cannot be compared to a truly racist society. In fact, my ancestors fled to the United States from Nazi-occupied Europe in order to escape real systemic racism. Nazi Germany aggressively boycotted Jewish businesses and taught schoolchildren that the Aryan race was inherently superior to all others. That’s systemic racism. And while no one has offered reparations for the Holocaust — as if such a thing could satisfactorily make up for its atrocities — Jewish culture emphasizes an attitude of resilience rather than victimization. The best way to honor the memory of our persecuted ancestors is to learn from the past, vow to never repeat it, and move on to make the most of our lives.

Racism is an unfortunate part of America’s history, but we have clearly progressed. We have black celebrities, black sports stars, and we’ve even had a black president. That would not be possible in a racist country. 

What I fear is that indoctrinating students with critical race theory will create a self-fulfilling prophecy. Instilling the belief that life is rigged against certain people encourages a fixed mindset rather than an empowering growth mindset. Regardless of any real or perceived disadvantages we may have, Americans are still more advantaged than most other people in the world, simply because we live in an industrialized nation with ample opportunities for education, employment, and access to resources. Why not see the glass as (at least) half full?

This isn’t to imply that human rights issues no longer exist today. They certainly do, but they don’t stem from white privilege. Slavery has long been abolished. Equal rights for black Americans and other minority groups have been established since the civil rights movement. We all rooted for Martin Luther King, Jr. when we learned about him in elementary school. Let’s not go one step forward and two steps back.

It’s time to move on from this issue that is being strategically used to destabilize the country. We face different issues today. We’ve invented new forms of segregation, such as between the left and the right, the masked and the unmasked — and, most disturbingly, the vaccinated and the unvaccinated. Scientists, doctors, and others who question the safety of experimental injections are being systematically censored and demonized. People are losing their jobs because they don’t feel comfortable participating in a massive medical experiment.  The parallels to Nazi Germany’s human experiments are quite striking, though this particular iteration of discrimination is colorblind.

Indeed, we have a battle to fight — but let’s aim our indignation at the real enemy.

***

This article was originally published in American Thinker.

Is “Natural” Food a Scam?

“Natural” =/= Organic

Many foods at the grocery store have a label similar to the one above. “Natural” seems to imply the same principles as “organic” food, but this is not the case. Food can be labelled “natural” without being organic at all; it may even contain a ton of preservatives and chemicals. Unlike organic food, there is no standard that must be met to label a food as “natural.” In other words, doing so is merely a marketing trick.

Though organic food is more expensive and harder to find than regular food, going organic is one simple way to make the world a better place. If people boycott low quality foods and support organic ones instead, corporations will be pressured to produce decent food. Organic food isn’t only better for animals and the environment, but for our health as well.

Is Organic Food a Scam?

One knows that “organic” food is becoming popular if Walmart starts selling it.

A few years ago, organic food was thought to be a superfluous luxury. Hardly anyone wanted to pay extra for “special” food that appears to be identical to “regular” food. Some people believe the whole trend is just a scam, and in some cases that might be true. Yet after many years of altering my diet to include as many organic foods as I’m able to afford, I have noticed real differences. For one, organic food is not genetically modified, so it looks and tastes different.

Genetically modified apples are bigger, shinier, and more “perfectly” shaped than organic ones, but they contain less flavor and nutrients.

Organic food also contains natural ingredients, and isn’t laden with cancer causing chemicals such as artificial dyes. Personally, I think that’s worth the extra cost.

“Regular” food is still the most common option, despite more and more people going organic. Of course, this variety is also cheaper. The problem is it tends to be low quality…and tragically, meat that has no “organic” or “free range” label originates from industrialized slaughterhouses where the animals are injected with fattening hormones and forced to live in filthy, horrific conditions.

This is the reality…but people continue to support it because it’s cheap and convenient.

Food must pass strict standards to be labelled “organic.” The label cannot be obtained if the food product is genetically modified or contains unnatural substances such as high-fructose corn syrup, MSG, or lab created ingredients. If the food label lists several ingredients that the average person cannot easily pronounce, it is most likely not organic.

Skittles: Taste the Chemicals

Organic food contains relatively simple, pure ingredients, and usually has fewer ingredients than regular food.

INGREDIENTS: raw organic white honey, unsweetened organic dark chocolate, natural peppermint oil

If meat is organic, that means the animals were fed appropriate diets and treated better than the ones in slaughterhouses. Mad cow disease developed as a result of feeding cattle diets of corn and ground meat, which damaged their digestive systems. Cows on organic farms are fed grass, which is what they are supposed to eat.

Most people would probably prefer to eat the purest, highest quality food, but the problem is organic food isn’t widely available and is too expensive for some to afford. On average, it costs about 10% more than regular food. This is especially problematic for those with large families to feed.

Might I suggest eating less meat? That’s what I decided to do, because organic produce is more affordable than organic meat. Besides, most Americans eat more meat than what’s good for us.

In sum, I believe the “organic” label is more than just a marketing ploy. (Labeling food “natural,” on the other hand, is just that.) Going organic accomplishes several good things. First of all, our diet becomes healthier…but more than that, we vote with our wallets; the growing number of people purchasing organic products sends the message to corporations that we care about the environment, animal rights, and our own bodies.

The Cost of “Progress”

When a new technological invention becomes widely used, the world changes. The main purpose of technological progress is to make life easier. Cars transport us farther and faster than horses and buggies, and thanks to washing machines we no longer have to spend hours doing laundry (unless we put it off for several weeks, maybe). Invention improves certain aspects of our lives, but at a cost. The latest technology hasn’t necessarily granted us more leisure time and less stress; in many ways it has made life more fast paced and overwhelming.

We tend to think of technology as additive, simply providing us more options, but it is actually transformative. The changes brought about by new inventions can be positive or negative. Faster and easier isn’t always better; for instance, modern transportation created a new set of problems such as drunk driving, pollution, and a decline in people’s fitness due to lack of exercise. The invention of the automobile literally changed the landscape of the world. Paved roads are such a common sight that my little cousin thought God created them along with animals and people.

California in particular has been built with the automobile in mind. Buildings are sprawled miles apart from each other, so a car is required to reach everywhere one needs to go. Older places such as New York and London have condensed layouts because they were built before the invention of automobiles. That is why those places are more walkable than California.

Typical Californian Sprawl

In Contrast: New York City

Since new inventions radically change our lives, the environment, and the way we behave, we would be naive to think of technological progress as inherently good. There is sacrifice involved in exchange for the quick and easy. Are polluted skies worth the luxury of relatively cheap air travel? Are quality clothes worth spending more money on than fast fashion from Forever 21? Are we willing to give up our privacy for the thrill of receiving “likes” on social media? Our inventions reveal our values, and I hope we have enough wisdom to direct technology in such a way that we make true progress.

Sweet Thirteen

“Your cousin has his bar mitzvah this year. It’s sad that Grandmother can’t be there.”

I knew December 17th was my cousin’s birthday, as well as the birthday of my late grandmother, but I didn’t know what a bar mitzvah was.

“What’s a bar mitzvah?” I asked my mother.

“It’s like a sweet sixteen party, but for Jewish boys.”

I was horrified. Scenes from Sweet Sixteen flashed through my mind: live DJs, limousines, alcohol fountains, enabling parents. Mom must have known what I was thinking by the expression on my face because she said, “It’s not as stupid as the parties on that show.”

I felt a little better. My quite uneventful sixteenth birthday had just passed, and though I had only met my cousin once in my life, I knew he was younger than me.

“Nate isn’t sixteen, though,” I said.

“Yeah. For Jews, the important age is thirteen.”

“Oh. Why?” I asked.

“I don’t know,” Mom replied, and the conversation ended.

***

While my extended family back East participated in Jewish coming of age ceremonies that I occasionally heard about but was never invited to, I grew up in Idaho and didn’t know the first thing about Jewish culture. I didn’t even know my mother was Jewish until I was in high school, after a relative mentioned the fact. After finding out, I had many questions about Hanukkah and Yiddish and bar mitzvahs, but to my disappointment, Mom didn’t know much more than I did about any of those things. She grew up in a non-practicing home, and all she learned was that in order to be a good Jewish girl or boy, there are two rules to follow:

1. Become either a doctor or a lawyer.
2. Don’t become a Christian.

But Mom failed both of those. She had always been energetic, unable to sit still for longer than two minutes; she liked to pace, work with her hands, stand on her feet. Academics were not for her. She became a preschool teacher, a profession that was not nearly prestigious enough according to my grandparents.

Her next unpardonable sin was to become a Christian. While she was still an atheist, she met some coworkers who seemed like very good people, full of life and joy, and she wanted what they had. One day she asked them, “What are such happy people like you doing in a dump like this?”

They told her about Jesus Christ, invited her to church, and soon enough my mother became a Christian. Already wayward in the Jewish community, she had no hope of acceptance after that. Most Jews today do not believe in God, and many claim that if a Jewish person becomes a Christian, that person is no longer Jewish. (I’ve never understood that; do religious beliefs change a person’s DNA?) To make a long story short, that is why we weren’t invited to any bar mitzvahs.

***

Like many teenagers, I went through a Bob Marley phase. The lyrics of “Buffalo Soldier” always stood out to me:

“If you know, if you know your history,

then you would know where you’re coming from.

Then you wouldn’t have to ask me,

‘Who the hell do you think I am?'”

With those words in mind, I wanted to find out all I could about the culture of my ancestors. And apparently I wasn’t the only one, because the DNA industry has grown like dandelions on the lawn in springtime. According to Technology Review (2019), more than 26 million people have taken DNA tests through services such as Ancestry.com in attempt to learn more about their origins. There are even similar services for pets now. Quite literally, everyone and their dog has gotten their DNA done.

Could this trend reflect a longing for identity, a collective curiosity about the historical roots that most postmodern people have been cut off from?

In any case, when I researched the bar mitzvah tradition, I unearthed a root much deeper than an indulgent birthday party; turning thirteen is important because it is considered the age of accountability. (For boys, anyway – interestingly, bat mitzvahs take place at age twelve for girls.) Indeed, “mitzvah” means “commandment,” implying that someone is old enough to follow God’s standard of morality and be held responsible for his or her sins – old enough to know better, in secular terms.

While reflecting on this, I was struck by the irony of it. Most Jewish people who practice these rituals don’t believe in God anymore. Despite having such a rich history, the postmodern bar mitzvah is nothing more than a sweet thirteen party after all.

5G, Blockchain, and You

Many questions have arisen since the World Health Organization declared a worldwide public health emergency on January 30, 2020. Where did COVID-19 originate? How long will it take to “flatten the curve?” Are ubiquitous lockdowns necessary or effective for an ailment that has a 99% recovery rate? And perhaps most perplexingly, why did the World Economic Forum host Event 201 in October 2019 – a simulated pandemic exercise that eerily followed the real coronavirus narrative, complete with stuffed souvenir microbes?

So far, none of these questions have been sufficiently answered. Yet as the narrative goes on, the picture of the “new normal” we’ve been ushered into gradually becomes clearer.

Klaus Schwab, Executive Chairman of the World Economic Forum, sees coronavirus as the catalyst for the “Great Reset” and the “fourth industrial revolution.” According to him, “The pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world.” He seems excited, but what will that “reset” mean for us?

Schwab proposes to “build back better” using technologies such as artificial intelligence, the Internet of Things, 3D printing, and nanotechnology – which are supposed to be more “sustainable” than current technologies. The World Economic Forum has also toyed with the idea of universal basic income to fix economic issues caused by the coronavirus lockdowns.

Soon after Event 201 seemed to go live, skeptics of the official narrative speculated about a possible link between the pandemic and 5G technology, which was deemed “essential” and continued to be installed during the lockdowns. Official news sources claimed the virus originated in Wuhan, China – where, of all places, 5G was among the first to launch in November 2019.

Like mRNA vaccines, health effects of radiation in the 5G range haven’t been tested, and many citizens have been protesting its installation. However, thousands of peer reviewed studies have confirmed deleterious effects of existing wireless frequencies, ranging from tinnitus in some people to life-threatening arrhythmias in others, so there is reason to believe that 5G can cause similar problems. Indeed, symptoms of microwave sickness vary as widely as symptoms of COVID-19.

Despite mainstream news sources systematically ridiculing anyone who says “coronavirus” and “5G” in the same sentence, there is no disputing the fact that 5G will form the infrastructure of the fourth industrial revolution – namely AI and the IoT. With the rollout of vaccine passports, yet another one of 5G’s raisons d’etre becomes apparent; every passport holder is assigned a blockchain code that broadcasts his or her mRNA injection status. These codes could easily be expanded to contain other personal information as well, such as one’s social security number, banking information, and current location. A biometric digital ID – like ID2020, for instance – would essentially connect everyone to the IoT.

If all of this sounds a bit far-fetched, scan your vaccine passport and take a trip to China. Virtually every item there is marked with a blockchain code, which allows for cashless payments by scanning the code with a cell phone – or, disturbingly, by scanning your face, which is stored in a vast AI database and recognized by every camera you pass by in the street and in commercial buildings.

Once you’re assigned a digital ID, your data is collected at all times – where you go, what you buy, whether you’ve been “bad” or “good” – and this data can be used for a variety of purposes, from selling your information to advertisers, to informing law enforcement of your daily routine, to assigning you a social credit score.

So, there you have it – a method of surveillance that surpasses Orwell’s wildest nightmares. The vaccine passport is your ticket to a brave new technocracy.

***

This article was originally published at The Activist Post.

In Defense of the “Fringe” (Google’s Doublespeak Term for “Truth”)

Draconian mandates, civil unrest, and government tyranny that once existed only in the pages of William Cooper’s 1991 manifesto Behold a Pale Horse have become recurring scenes on the daily news. Now that the alleged New World Order seems to be manifesting before our eyes and causing people to wonder if conspiracy theorists are really just paranoid lunatics after all, Google CEO Sundar Pichai has declared a mission to hide unconventional opinions from Internet search results with a “fringe ranking” algorithm that blocks “fake news, hate speech, conspiracy theories, or science/medical/history denial,” according to Google software engineer Paul Haahr.

For those who aren’t fluent in doublespeak, that means Google is actively censoring opinions that differ from official mainstream narratives presented to us on Fox News, CNN, and the like. Included on Google’s blacklist are Matt Walsh’s blog, teapartyeconomist.com, and The American Spectator. A leaked Google document states, “The deceptive_news domain blacklist is going to be used by many search features to filter problematic sites that violate the good neighbor and misrepresentation policies.”

Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube (owned by Google) are in on the censorship campaign as well, deleting posts about topics such as adverse health effects of 5G, doctors discussing misleading COVID information, and everyday citizens pointing out discrepancies in news stories. Clips of an interview with Senator Scott Jensen, also a physician, were systematically removed from social media sites, presumably because he talked about government pressure upon health care workers to inflate COVID-19 death statistics. Subsequently the Minnesota Medical Board threatened Dr. Jensen’s license despite years of exemplary practice that earned him the Family Physician of the Year award in 2016.

But why is Big Tech blacklisting law abiding citizens for practicing the critical thinking skills they were supposed to learn in high school — such as listening to more than one side of a story, noticing contradictions, and considering underlying motives behind a message?

Speaking of motives, let’s consider what someone may have to gain from sharing controversial information. Doing so is unlikely to generate money, admiring followers, or an invitation to the Ellen DeGeneres Show. Any unconventional opinion will receive more loathes than “likes.”

The online “truth movement” may have its share of opportunists and attention seekers, but the main reason for its emergence is that people simply want the truth — the whole truth and nothing but the truth — without the blatant political manipulation that characterizes mainstream news sources.

On the other hand, what does Big Tech have to gain from censoring certain information — and what do they have to lose by letting it be shared freely?

Ever since the declassification of Operation Mockingbird, mainstream news has lost credibility as a fair and impartial source of information. Now more than ever, people are realizing that we mustn’t rely on the television to do our thinking for us. We are turning elsewhere for information, namely the Internet — the final frontier of the free press that’s now compromised by the “Good Neighbor Policy,” which states:

“The beginning of the workflow starts when a website is placed on a watchlist which is used for monitoring of sites to determine if they violate the Good Neighbor Policy. This watchlist is maintained and stored by Ares with access restricted to policy & enforcement specialists working on the Good Neighbor Policy. Access to the listing can also be shared at the discretion of pcounsel and legal investigations on a need to know basis to enforce or enrich the policy violations….Once a domain is determined to be violating the misrepresentation policy or the Good Neighbor Policy, such patterns are then added to deceptive_news_blacklist_domains.txt by the Trust & Safety team.”

Who would be considered “bad neighbors,” then, according to this policy? Is there a particular demographic that fits Google’s definition of “fringe,” a certain political or religious perspective that classifies as “hate speech?” Is Dr. Jensen’s criticism of health care fraud “fake news?”

Is Google censoring conservatives, Christians, conspiracy theorists — or simply critical thinkers?

The modern truth movement might be compared to the Industrial Workers of the World (aka “Wobblies”) in the early 20th century, another “fringe” group that disagreed with official narratives of the time, such as the virtues of predatory capitalism and war. They, like today’s “truth community,” consisted of a nebulous group of individuals from various cultural and professional backgrounds. Also like the truth seekers of today, the ragtag group of socialists in the IWW were portrayed by the ruling powers as having dangerous ideas; today they would be violators of the Good Neighbor Policy. In reality they simply and genuinely wanted a better life for the working class, and despite the media’s false accusations against them, the Wobblies had the support of many who could relate to their ideals.

The late Elizabeth Gurley Flynn, for example, a leading figure in the IWW, worked tirelessly on behalf of the oppressed. She defended the poor and disadvantaged more faithfully than the majority of churches did at the time, though she wasn’t particularly religious. The efforts of the IWW to form unions and end child labor are chronicled in Howard Zinn’s brutally honest A People’s History of the United States, yet they’re skimmed over or omitted in high school history textbooks, no doubt because these important accomplishments were achieved by a demonized group of socialists. Everyone learns about Betsy Ross, but who’s Elizabeth Flynn?

Elizabeth Flynn: The only reason I’ve heard of her is because we’re blood relatives!

Yet grassroots “fringe” movements, often at the cutting edge of social progress, are surprisingly resilient despite endless attempts to silence them. Thanks to the fringe factor, they lack the formal hierarchy of institutions that tend to breed political corruption. Ambitious social climbers shy away from the fringe, as they’d rather seek fortune and fame where they’re more likely to be found. Those who stick around are sincerely devoted to the cause, often at their own expense.

Through history these well meaning, yet misunderstood movements have been censored and slandered not only by the ruling authorities, but by sycophants who uphold the status quo at any cost. Hitler couldn’t have achieved dictatorship by himself; police imprisoned Martin Luther King, the Pharisees crucified Christ, and so on….

Yet inevitably, miraculously, time and again the truth has a way of revealing itself despite all efforts to suppress it — Good Neighbor Policy included. As stated by Elizabeth Flynn:

“History has a long-range perspective. It ultimately passes stern judgement on tyrants and vindicates those who fought, suffered, were imprisoned, and died for human freedom, against political oppression and economic slavery.”

Coronavirus and the Constitution: Entering the Not-So-Brave New World

Two months have passed since the lockdown began, and statistics indicate that the coronavirus death toll hasn’t risen as high as we might have supposed. Yet already we hear rhetoric of a “post-COVID world,” hauntingly reminiscent of the “post-9/11 world.” However, unlike the tangible event of 9/11, COVID is a threat of an entirely different nature, an “invisible enemy.”

The enemy isn’t “out there” to defeat in the old-fashioned way, with bombs and machine guns. But all the same, its pervasiveness renders us into a constant state of paranoia. Even our loved ones become potential threats; we all pose a risk to those around us, therefore perpetrating the omnipresent danger.

To use the post-9/11 term, we are all terrorists. That’s why we must stay under house arrest until a treatment is produced to save us from ourselves. The alphabet agencies even gave us a script: we’re supposed to play the part of Sleeping Beauty as we await Prince Charming’s cure for our mysterious ailment.

But the problem with fairytales is they fall apart under scrutiny; we struggle to believe in the knight in shining armor because experience has taught us again and again that he doesn’t exist.

So it is with tales spun by government officials. The real Sleeping Beauty still needs to pay the bills, and a check of $1200 simply won’t do. She doesn’t have time to wait around for Bill Gates to unveil the miracle vaccine.

And by the time he does, who will still believe the fairytale? As fatalities continue not to skyrocket and hospitals are underwhelmed, life goes on….Everyday events begin to overshadow media induced hysteria. The spell breaks; the masquerade ends.

Yet the question remains: will the sociopolitical climate restabilize after the invisible enemy’s defeat? We’ve entered a Brave New Normal, we are repeatedly told. Life so eerily resembles the flick Contagion that we might be tempted to fast-forward and spoil the ending.

Is the final solution portrayed there a realistic possibility? Imagine — a cashless economy (since cash is germ-ridden), centralized global government, and militarized police force guiding the frightened masses like shepherds watching over their flock! The CDC’s contribution to that particular film production suggests they think it could solve the problem. The cure therefore must not only be physical, but socioeconomic.

So, suddenly the government cares more intensely about citizen health than most citizens care about their own health. The TRACE Act permits contact tracers to keep an eye on whether we’ve crossed paths with the invisible enemy; with Operation Warp Speed, troops will administer vaccines door to door.

But all of this reveals the patronizing mindset of our benevolent shepherds. We are no longer to trust our own research and direct experience — after all, unlike other flus, this one has the curious tendency of manifesting no symptoms. Instead we are to place our wellbeing into the hands of contact tracers, the WHO, the military, anyone other than ourselves.

In other words, we’re allowing authority to dictate reality, and furthermore our every movement.

But if we ignore all of this and go about our business, aren’t we at risk of spreading The Virus? Doubtfully — but if we allow the Naziesque strategies of “flattening the curve” to escalate, we certainly put our liberties at risk. Our Constitutional rights — freedom of speech, religion, and assembly to name a few — have come under fire behind the veneer of “health and safety” measures against the seemingly almighty Virus.

Meanwhile, many of us suspect that if we defend our God-given rights, the invisible enemy will fade like smoke — or like any other virus.

***

This essay was originally published at Global Research.