Social Emotional Learning SEL has generated criticism from parents, educators, and cultural commentators who argue that its underlying purpose extends beyond student well-being. SEL is not simply an educational model, it’s a “Trojan horse” carrying hidden ideological objectives.
SEL fosters a specific globalist worldview, subtly promoting ideas of collective identity and global governance under the guise of emotional education. SEL curricula introduce moral and social values rooted in progressive or humanist ideologies that emphasize global unity, equity, and social justice. SEL aligns closely with movements advocating for a one-world government or centralized global cooperation, where national and parental values may be diminished in favor of universalist ideals. SEL’s language of “inclusion” and “empathy” reflects moral and political priorities more than educational ones.
SEL can inadvertently pressure students to adopt new religious and moral perspectives that may conflict with those instilled at home. In this way, the school curriculum becomes a competing source of moral formation, encouraging children to identify with the beliefs and worldviews endorsed by educators or curriculum developers rather than the traditions of their families. It’s a subtle form of indoctrination, designed to reshape how young people perceive social and moral issues.
SEL prioritizes emotional development at the expense of critical thinking. The growing emphasis on self-awareness, emotional reflection, and empathy reduces time and focus on academic subjects such as mathematics, science, history, and literature. The result is a shift from intellectual rigor toward emotional conditioning—training students to feel rather than to analyze or question.
SEL emphasizes EMPATHY over NEUTRALITY as a framework for emotional and political alignment with specific causes. This form of empathy demands agreement with contemporary ideological narratives concerning race, gender, and identity. Instead of fostering open-minded discussion, SEL promotes conformity to prevailing social dogmas.
The connection between SEL and the Lucifer Publishing Company
- Shared origins: The initial development of SEL is tied to the Fetzer Institute, which was founded by John Fetzer, a follower of the occultist Alice Bailey. Bailey was the founder of the Lucis Trust (originally Lucifer Publishing Company).
- Influential figures: David J. Sluyter, a founder of the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL), is listed as a Senior Advisor for the Fetzer Institute, further linking the organizations. The philosophy behind SEL is rooted in the spiritual and occultist views of Bailey and her followers.
The Lucis Trust’s philosophy
- The Lucis Trust promotes meditations, spiritual philosophies, and the idea of “World Goodwill” through meditation as a world service.
- It emphasizes spiritual growth, connection with the “spiritual hierarchy,” and service to humanity.
- The organization’s teachings include concepts of a higher spiritual path and achieving a higher state of consciousness.
