1 he primary aim of the Communists is to change society.
The primary aim of the social planners is to change
society. Obviously, the danger of progressive education
lies in its proximity to socialistic and communistic theories.
Dr. Bella V. Dodd, as an ex-Communist, told the United
States Senate Subcommittee on Internal Security in 1952:
"The Communist party as a whole adopted a line of being
for progressive education." She said that progressive education was "eagerly seized upon and championed by the
Comintern as being the ideal system for limiting the ability
of children in capitalistic societies to.read, write, and
think or act for themselves, and so to cause them to depend
upon the state for a guaranteed livelihood and for protection against the hazards caused by their inadequate
training for the battle of life."
John Morley, foreign correspondent, wrote: "I came
out of the Iron Curtain (secretly) in a wagon last year,
with two University of Prague professors. Both had been
educators and statesmen under Eduard Benes and Jan
Masaryk. Their conclusion as to the real reason back of the
'Red Victory' behind the Iron Curtain was that it was due,
for the most part, to Communist infiltration into schools,
all schools, from elementary to college level."
Concerning infiltration of the schools, he says: "I heard
it from Protestant Winston Churchill, from Hindu Nehru,
and directly from the lips of Pope Pius XII, that infiltration into schools is the modern method of most effectively
spreading the cancer of communism. Igor Gouzenko, who
confessed to Russian espionage in Canada and in the U. S.
a few years ago, told that Zarubin's Number One target
was the schools in Canada, the U. S. A., and Mexico.
Zarubin is Russia's Ambassador in Washington.''
In 1948 the planners of the new or modern, alias progressive, education, launched a full-scale invasion of the
schools in Pasadena under the leadership of Willard E.
Goslin. There seems little doubt that Pasadena was the
testing ground for the nation. Therefore, it behooves those
in other communities to know what really happened in
this conservative city.
Ihe average reader has had little or no opportunity to
get facts about the story. From coast to coast a distorted
version of what happened in Pasadena has been circulated. Practically all the material written concerning the
Pasadena controversy has indicated strongly that the
people who opposed Willard Goslin's modern education
were undermining the public schools and were thereby
traitors to America.
What were these people defending? What were they
The people of Pasadena were defending the American
way of life as provided in the Constitution and the Bill of
Rights. As parents, under the Constitution they exercised
their right to state the kind of education they wanted for
their children. Since thev felt that the traditional form of
education provided greater literacy, more inquisitive
minds in their children, and better discipline, parents
sought to protect this form of education against annihilation. They urged the teaching of competition, American
history, and the basic fundamentals. They defended the
free enterprise, capitalistic system.
When they stiw the axe swing at their concept of
democracv, saw the blows strike the individual, and
learned that they had to be re-educated in their concept
of democracy, they rebelled. Loose interpretation of the
Constitution, the use of textbooks (such as the "Building
America Series") which had been declared unfit for California schools, the hiring of radical left wing thinkers to
augment the school program, and constant pressure to
eliminate the majority vote in favor of the consensus, til
contrary to the security of the American way of life
frightened the people of Pasadena. It appeared that not
only democracy but also the public schools, life blood of
democracy, were in danger. Therefore, they protested
When citizens protested, they were ignored. As their
voices grew louder, they were criticized. Every conceivable weapon was used to drown the voice of the people-
Anyone who opposed the school administration vvtis
promptly denounced. Finally, when the people of Pass*
dena knew that their voices would not be heard, when
they learned that they must accept something they did no'
want, they turned to the one defense that the Constitutioi"
of the United States provided for them.
On June 2, 19,50, the voices of more than 22,000 people
were heard. In the secrecy of the election booth they
stamped their disapproval, and the Goslin administration
vvtis defeated by a vote of two to one. Five months 1 a*1''
Willard E. Goslin was asked to resign.
The Pasadena story should have ended with the rest
nation of Mr. Goslin. It didn't. The citizens of Pa.sadci>;1
found that instead of being heralded as the standard bear
ers for good education, they were being condemned lj
attackers of the public schools. Dr. Harold Benjamin °
the National Education Association branded Goslin's opp"'
sition as "the enemy."
In the summer of 1948, Willard E. Goslin assumed ''"
duties of superintendent of the Pasadena schools. He "'*
welcomed by many who, if they had taken the time •*
examine the contract that the Board of Education sign1'
at the request of the superintendent, might have be1'
wary. This contract virtually promoted the new super"
tendent to a role of supreme power. The board was
subordinate itself to the superintendent in the choice °
administrative personnel, outside lecturers, and in all '"''
ters pertaining to the schools.
In retrospect it is quite clear that this contract ma'
it possible for the superintendent to introduce ideas '"'
would otherwise have been rejected. When Willard G°
lin first interviewed the board, he asked them if Pasad'"'
were ready to become the "cutting edge" in educat"'
Undoubtedly, they didn't know what he meant. It is '1'" f
certain that he was proposing to them to use the I'asad''1',
schools as the testing ground for modern or progreS^
According to The Pasadena Story. Mr. Goslin had t'lf ,
goals: to improve the quality of teaching; to carr) c('"l'„
tion in democratic practices to the community; to defl>cji
lati/.e the administration. Although these goals may SOU
commendable, they carried all the elements required '
reconstruction of the school system and revision of c'"
munity thinking as well. .,
Like the planners of the new social order, Willard "1
lin did not wait for the enlightenment of the people b^B
introducing his program. Inasmuch as his program c0 J
tilted tt major change not only in the schools but in &jft
munity life as well, the people should have been C0nsuffl|
Anyone seeking to ferret out the story of Willard (,'||
lin's administration would find it exceedingly d'"'1'^
today. He did not leave an easy trail to follow. lvec"r
Fachs Fouum Nt