COVID Conformity and Division in American Schools.

The revealing past and the predictable steps to come.

In the 1950’s, the “Asch conformity experiments” were a series of psychological trials conducted by Solomon Asch.  The experiments demonstrated the degree to which a person’s remarks are influenced by others who provide an answer to a question, first.  Asch found that people were prepared to provide an answer, to be able to adapt to the rest of the group, even if it meant willingly ignoring reality.  This was the case with roughly 36.8% of the test population.

In the experiment, six individuals were actors and told to answer the same way to each given question, while the final participant, the seventh individual, was not an actor.  This seventh individual was, in fact, the only one that was being tested to see if they would conform to the six previous participants answers.  In all cases, the seventh participant, the one being tested to see if they would conform, was tasked with always answering last.  

The group was shown a card that contained one line on it, in a vertical direction.  The second card portrayed three lines of varying length, that were labeled A, B & C (exact example below, Figure 1). 


Beginning with the first participant, who was an actor and told how to answer beforehand, they would select the correct line on the second card that corresponded to the length of the singular line on the first card.  For example, in Figure 1, the correct answer is C.  After the first participant would answer C, the rest would follow suit by answering C.  Then the last individual would think, and correctly answer C.  As the second card changed and the correct answer was painfully obvious in each scenario, the other actors were instructed to follow the lead of the first participant and provide the same vocal answer, in order.  After the first participant would provide the wrong answer on purpose, but say it in a way that exuded confidence as if it were correct, the rest of the participant actors would follow with the same incorrect answer.  Then, the final participant would look confused as to why the previous participants had answered this way.  At first, the seventh participant would provide the correct answer, even if it went against the other participants purposefully incorrect answers.  However, over time, the seventh participant would eventually conform to the rest of the participants wrong answers, and almost look submissive in doing so.  Moreover, the results were described in the following way:

“In the control group, with no pressure to conform to the actors, the error rate on the critical stimuli was less than 1 percent.  In the actor condition also, the majority of participants' responses remained correct (63.2 percent), but a sizable minority of responses conformed to the actors' (incorrect) answer (36.8 percent).  The responses revealed strong individual differences.  Only 5 percent of participants were always swayed by the crowd.  25 percent of the sample consistently defied majority opinion, with the rest conforming on some trials.  An examination of all critical trials in the experimental group revealed that one-third of all responses were incorrect.  These incorrect responses often matched the incorrect response of the majority group (i.e., actors).  Overall, 75 percent of participants gave at least one incorrect answer out of the 12 critical trials.  In his opinion regarding the study results, Asch stated the following:

“That intelligent, well-meaning, young people are willing to call white, black; is a matter of concern.”

Regarding this study, there are frightening connections to be made between modern society and the culture of American education and its school staff members.  First, it can clearly be argued that countless people, perhaps far more than 36.8 percent of American society, are willing to conform to the masses, even when the opposite truth is right in front of their faces.  Second, to use a lost set of skills by many (i.e., literacy and observation), how many individuals have you seen walking their dogs, outside, by themselves, while wearing a mask?  How many people have you seen driving convertibles with the top down on a sunny 80-degree day while wearing a mask?  How many individuals have you seen wear masks inside of stores that state you have to wear them (i.e., blindly following a hastily imposed mandate)?  How many individuals have you seen wearing masks while driving in their cars—by themselves?

In one personal example, I was attending a dinner party with family members, at a restaurant in the Summer of 2020.  We had agreed as a group that we would not be wearing masks under any circumstances, upon entry to, or within the restaurant, as we never wear masks.  We were aware of their blatant ineffectiveness.

Upon entry, the hostess promptly asked us if we had masks.  We politely answered that we cannot wear them.  At which point, the hostess came around from behind her lectern, and grabbed a set of tongs that were placed next to a bowl of hot-cloth napkins that were folded into triangles.  She proceeded to pick up a napkin with the tongs and stretch them out to us, as this was apparently a viable solution to us not having masks.  The expectation was for us to hold a hot napkin up to our faces, as we walked approximately 20 yards from the front door to our table.  We refused again, politely, and the manager was called.  Once they arrived, they were polite and we were quickly shown to our table on the other side of the restaurant without any more concern given.

No napkins were handed out.  After observing the rest of the patrons in the restaurant, many were wearing masks around their necks, some on their heads, and some were placed on their tables next to their food plates.  Many people didn’t have masks at all.

What did this show?  It showed that orders come from the top down, regardless of the truth or level of logic.  It showed that demands come from the top down and people follow, regardless of how they look, feel, or whether or not they willfully and blindly submit their constitutional rights and freedom to complete strangers.

We left the restaurant after eating.  No one became sick as a result of our attendance or their proximity to us, because none of us were sick in the first place.  It was a sunny, 84-degree day in July. 

Famously, in a 60 Minuets episode on CBS in March of 2020, Dr. Anthony Fauci was asked about the usefulness of masks, while many have decided to unwittingly accept Dr. Fauci as a medical genius.  He stated that masks are largely ineffective and they don’t stop the transmission of a virus from one person to the next.  They may stop some spit, but they aren’t medical devices and they don’t work to impede viral transmission of any kind.  He even used the population in Japan as an example of what not to do.  He stated that when you see Japanese citizens walking around wearing masks in the general public, that isn’t accomplishing anything.  The masks are for the sick, if the sick decide to enter the public.  This keeps them from possibly spreading something they have to another, although even this approach is not effective.  Therefore, he stated, that wearing a mask may make one feel safe or that they are in fact making others feel safe by giving them a sense of “false security,” but they are ineffective as preventors of virial transmission.  The WHO (World Health Organization) said the exact same thing in March of 2020, over one year ago.  (Retrieved from:

Given these facts, how did American schools respond to an alleged virus that is less contagious than the flu?  Most American schools closed for the remainder of the year.  These schools immediately enacted mask-wearing mandates and social-distancing if students or staff were to return in-person, and any failure to comply would result in the firing of a school employee or the permanent removal of a student from that school district.

American schools responded in the least rational way possible and they congratulated themselves for doing so in the interest of “keeping everyone safe, in this era of a pandemic.”  The lack of logical thinking in this moment of American history by American educators, parents, students and those who pull the strings, had now become evident.  The enemies of freedom and rational thought exposed themselves on a grand scale, and they did so on the largest stage for the entire world to see. In the words of eighteenth century French philosopher La Rochefoucauld, regarding the effectiveness of propaganda that is spoken, heard and consistently repeated; “A man is like a rabbit, you catch him by the ears.”

Now, and predictably, schools are closing. Yes, colleges and universities across America are consolidating or completely closing their doors (look up what is happening in Pennsylvania). These were the schools that failed to adapt to the effectiveness of online learning, freedom and independent thought. Many institutions that are remaining open are requiring experimental inoculations for the students and staff who choose return. At this moment, any state can mandate that their colleges and universities require students and staff to take these experimental shots in order to return, in person. The only thing colleges and universities need is a ‘wink and a nod’ from their state government officials, and it’s game on. Just wait for what will happen in the summer of 2021 when schools are closed. Mark my words; when the cat is away, the mice will play.

The question will now be, how many students and staff will return? Learning online in the comfort of your own home, or—come to our institution, stay in a dormitory by yourself, wear a mask, socially distance and take all of the governments required experimental shots. These are the two choices given, if a full return to the way things were in 2019 isn’t the option.

The healthiest choice is clear. Those who return to such totalitarian environments, stand on the social-distance sticker on the ground and take the “required” shots; are examples of the seventh participant in the Asch conformity experiment, perhaps without knowing what the factual answer is at all. Those who don’t conform, will be free to find healthier alternatives that are absent of government overreach.

Fortunately, many parents and students are voicing their righteous indignation, in particular at the K12 local level. However, “the powers that be” have now implemented another social-play to combat the free-thinkers. In an effort to further confuse and divide the populace, the CDC has now stated that those who are wearing a mask should be considered visibly “un-vaccinated” and those who are not wearing a mask should be considered “vaccinated.” This begs the question, what about those of us who have never worn a mask and will never get the experimental shots?

In reality, this “switcheroo” of a year-long totalitarian social experiment was always part of the nefarious next step. Now, the conformists may wear the mask less frequently, because they have either been inoculated with the experimental drugs, or they are visually tricking others into thinking they have done so. This is a combination of both direct and indirect peer pressure. It’s another way to convince the mask-wearing populace to subject themselves to the experimental drugs, both inside and outside of schools, among both youth and adults.

Welcome to Pavlov’s dog. Except the whistle is the mask, and there’s never been a reward.

BIO: Dr. Sean M. Brooks is the author of several books including; The Unmasking of American Schools: The Sanctioned Abuse of Americas Teachers and Students, and the host of the podcast; American Education FM.