Indoctrinating children into a corporate-controlled educational system that requires unjustified identification through third-party providers raises serious ethical, legal, and moral concerns. This practice can be considered a form of child abuse because it exploits the vulnerability of children, compromises their privacy, and prioritizes corporate interests over the well-being and rights of the child.
Below is an explanation of why this is problematic, why some parents refuse to sign such agreements, and the potential consequences of these practices.
1. Violation of Children's Privacy and Consent
Children are inherently vulnerable and unable to fully understand the implications of their personal data being collected, stored, and shared.
When schools require students to use systems that involve:
- Apple IDs tied to their personal information,
- Microsoft SSO logins that link their identity across platforms,
- Google accounts for email and cloud storage,
- Third-party educational platforms with unknown data-sharing agreements,
they are effectively creating a digital profile of the child that can be tracked, analyzed, and potentially exploited.
This is done without the informed consent of the child, and often, parents are coerced into agreeing to these terms as a condition of their child’s education.
The requirement for children to scan their fingerprints further exacerbates the issue. Biometric data is highly sensitive and, unlike passwords, cannot be changed if compromised.
By collecting such data, schools and their corporate partners are exposing children to lifelong risks of identity theft, surveillance, and misuse of their personal information.
“ Raise your words, not voice. It is rain that grows flowers, not thunder. ” ― Rumi
2. Coercion of Parents
Parents are often forced to sign agreements that they may not fully understand or agree with, under the threat that their child will not be allowed to attend the school.
These agreements typically include clauses that:
- Waive the parents' and child's rights to privacy,
- Allow the school and its corporate partners to collect, store, and share data,
- Require the use of specific devices and systems, such as Apple products, which may not align with the family's values or financial situation.
Some parents refuse to sign these agreements because they recognize the risks involved, including:
- The potential for their child’s data to be sold to third parties,
- The lack of transparency about how the data will be used,
- The ethical concerns of exposing their child to corporate indoctrination and surveillance.
However, refusing to sign these agreements can result in their child being excluded from the school, creating a dilemma where parents must choose between their child’s education and their child’s privacy and rights.
Ask yourself: What is one failure that you have turned into your greatest lesson?
Were the Mac is that Apple? Phoning home? ..
3. Unfair Uses of Corporate Systems
The integration of corporate systems into education often serves the interests of the corporations rather than the students. Some of the unfair practices include:
a) Data Monetization
Children’s data, including their browsing habits, academic performance, and even biometric information, can be sold to advertisers or other third parties. This creates a profit-driven incentive for corporations to collect as much data as possible, often at the expense of the child’s privacy.
b) Surveillance and Behavioral Profiling
The use of interconnected systems allows for constant monitoring of students’ activities. This can lead to the creation of detailed behavioral profiles that may be used to influence or manipulate the child in the future, such as through targeted advertising or predictive analytics.
c) Lack of Transparency
Parents and students are rarely informed about the full extent of data collection and sharing. The agreements they are forced to sign often contain vague language that allows for broad and unrestricted use of the data.
d) Exclusion and Inequality
Requiring families to purchase specific devices, such as Apple products, creates financial barriers that disproportionately affect low-income families. This can lead to further inequality in education, as some children may be unable to participate fully due to their family’s financial situation.
Ask yourself: What is something you regret doing?
4. Long-Term Consequences for Children
The use of corporate-controlled systems in education can have lasting effects on children, including:
a) Loss of Privacy
Once a child’s data is collected and shared, it is nearly impossible to retrieve or delete it. This means that children may grow up with a permanent digital footprint that they had no control over creating.
b) Manipulation and Exploitation
As children grow older, the data collected about them can be used to manipulate their behavior, such as through targeted advertising or political messaging. This undermines their autonomy and ability to make independent decisions.
c) Normalization of Surveillance
By exposing children to surveillance and data collection from a young age, these practices become normalized. This can lead to a society where individuals are more accepting of invasive technologies and less likely to question their use.
“ Be who you needed when you were younger. ” ― Anonymous
5. Why Some Parents Refuse to Sign the Agreement
Parents who refuse to sign the school’s agreement often do so because they recognize the ethical and practical issues involved.
Their concerns may include:
- The lack of transparency about how their child’s data will be used,
- The potential for their child’s data to be sold or misused,
- The financial burden of purchasing specific devices,
- The moral objection to exposing their child to corporate indoctrination and surveillance.
However, refusing to sign the agreement can have serious consequences, such as:
- Their child being denied access to education at the school,
- Social stigma or pressure from other parents and school administrators,
- Limited alternatives for education, especially in areas where such practices are widespread.
6. Why Could it be Considered Child Abuse?
The practices described can be considered a form of child abuse because they exploit the vulnerability of children for corporate gain. Specifically:
- Exploitation of Vulnerability: Children are unable to understand or consent to the collection and use of their data.
- Violation of Rights: These practices violate children’s rights to privacy and autonomy, as outlined in international agreements such as the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
- Harmful Long-Term Effects: The creation of permanent digital profiles and the normalization of surveillance can have lasting negative effects on children’s development and well-being.
“ Keep your face always toward the sunshine - and shadows will fall behind you. ” ― Walt Whitman
Prioritizing profit and control over the rights and well-being
The use of corporate-controlled systems in schools, particularly those that require unjustified identification of children through third-party providers, prioritizes profit and control over the rights and well-being of children.
Parents who refuse to sign such agreements are standing up for their child’s privacy and autonomy, but they often face significant challenges as a result. To address these issues, there must be greater transparency, accountability, and regulation of how children’s data is collected and used in educational settings. Additionally, alternative educational models that respect children’s rights and privacy should be promoted and supported.
- A Tale of Two Sta*lin*s: Subaru’s Driver Comfort vs. SpaceX’s Global Surveillance
- An Intense Desire of Domain Name Market
- Building Trust in the Realm of Digital Privacy
- Canvas of Surveillance Capitalism: Sell 'Your' Data to the Highest Bidder
- Caring for Children or Corporate Cover-Up? The Troubling Duality of Government Action
Troubling contradictions in governance
On one hand, the government claims to act in the interest of children by proposing laws to "protect" them, such as banning social media for those under 16, while on the other hand, it actively facilitates the exploitation of children’s privacy and data by selling their digital identities to corporations.
This duality raises serious ethical and legal concerns about the role of government in protecting its citizens, particularly vulnerable populations like children, and whether political immunity should shield government actors who engage in such practices.
By stating this scenario out and about we conclude this part, and we will continue the exploration into further indoctrination methods with the next article.
Thank you for scrolling!
DR SPACEQUIRE NOW with JOHNNY MAGRITT(e) APPLESEED.PRO and the band:
Determine Your Course
If you require additional assistance feel free to reach out to our intelligence departments via booking a consultation herein. For a comprehensive analysis or to introduce yourself in a unique way. However, as time is of the essence, and the effectiveness of this action remains uncertain. Act swiftly to address your IT needs! 🚀 #ITSolutions #TechSupport #InnovationInProgress #johhnyappleseedpro