By Ashley Hayes
Dr. Reizer’s article of March 26, 2026, “An important message for our site visitors,” discusses a vitally important truth every American should know: The stories we have been fed about our history, for as long as we’ve been alive, are LIES!
There has been a conspiracy in play by a relatively small group of individuals for over two hundred years to create a world that serves them, and them alone, who have used hidden technologies to their advantage, destroyed it (or hid it) and the things it enabled them to build, and then covered up its existence. The members of this secrety society (many of whom have served in very public roles) have been able to do this via their control of manufacturing, the government, banking, transportation, the media, textbooks, and all major publishing.
If you are a truthseeker new to this site, I urge you to spend some time watching the videos Dr. Reizer, founder of NoFakeNews, has shared related to Old World buildings and their true history — and reading the many articles associated therewith (https://nofakenews.net/?s=old+world). Once you do so, the truth — that we have been lied to our entire lives — will be undeniable.
Furthermore, I highly recommend an excellent youtube channel I recently discovered: Buried Century (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCN3yMLpsqjKRFvwK5uO9AFw). Of particular interest to me was the video entitled “The Last Schoolteacher Who Taught the Original History – What She Was Told To Stop Saying (1901).
Edna Morse was a schoolteacher in Osage County, Kansas. She was told, in 1901 (the year William McKinley was assassinated and Theodore Roosevelt became president) to stop teaching actual economic history to her students. She refused to do so, and was fired.
The narrator discovered Edna Morse’s story, by accident, while looking into the adoption of standardized textbooks across the midwest for the years 1895 to 1910, “trying to understand why the economic content in American classroom instruction shifted so dramatically in such a short window.”
His investigation revealed that the textbooks weren’t the real story, the teachers were — “because the teachers remembered what was there before. And a few of them wrote it down.”
The narrator continues, as follows:
What Edna Morse was told to stop saying was not radical. It was not dangerous by any reasonable measure. It was simply the economic history that American children had been taught for the better part of three decades: the mechanics of how money was created, the historical relationship between land ownership and poverty, the documented record of who benefited when currency policy changed and who bore the costs.
These were not opinions. They were the curriculum.
And in 1901, across the country, quietly and without public announcement, they began to disappear. The timing was not accidental: 1901 was the year William McKinley was assassinated and Theodore Roosevelt took the presidency. It was the year United States Steel was incorporated as the largest corporation in the history of the world, capitalized, at one point, four billion dollars — a figure that exceeded the entire annual revenue of the federal government.
It was the year that the consolidation of American industrialization and financial power that had been building for three decades reached a kind of completion. And the question of what American schoolchildren should understand about how that consolidation had occurred became, for the first time, a question that the men who had accomplished it had both the motive and the institutional means to answer.
To understand why 1901 matters, you have to go back to 1879. That was the year Henry George published Progess and Poverty, an examination of why economic depressions occurred and why poverty persisted alongside industrial growth. The book sold three million copies in a decade. For context, that was approximately one copy for every 20 American adults alive at the time. It was the second best-selling book in the United States for a period of time behind only the Bible for a period in the 1880s. It was taught in schools, it was debated in churches. It was the lens through which a generation of American teachers understood and explained economic life to their students.
George’s central argument was specific and falsifiable. He contended that the concentration of land ownership was the primary mechanism by which wealth extracted from productive labor accumulated in the hands of those who produced nothing. He documented the pattern across historical economies, named the mechanism with precision, and proposed a remedy so straightforward that it terrified the people that it would’ve affected: a single tax on land value. Not on labor. Not on production. On the value of land itself, which increased not because of anything the landowner did but because of the community growing around it.
It was not a fringe position.
Andrew Carnegie called Progress and Poverty “one of the most important books ever written,” before he changed his mind about saying so publicly.
Politicians built careers on it; teachers taught it as established economic history — because in 1880, it essentially was. This is the curriculum Edna Morse was still using in 1901. And this is why the letter she wrote to her county superintendent is worth reading carefully.”
She had received, as had teachers across Kansas, Ohio, Indiana, and a dozen other states, a new curriculum framework that year. The frameworks arrived through state education boards which had begun receiving substantial organizational support from a network of “philanthropic” foundations that had not existed a decade earlier. The framing was always the same: modernization, efficiency, preparing students for the industrial economy.
The new curriculum frameworks were thorough and well-produced. They specified content with a precision that earlier frameworks had not. And what they specified — with equal precision — was what should no longer be included:
The economic history of monetary creation was gone;
– The documented history of deflationary policy in the 1870s and the 1880s, which had transferred wealth from debtors to creditors on a scale that a generation of economists had called “The greatest organized robbery in American history” was gone;
– Henry George’s Land Value Analysis was gone;
– The Greenback Movement which had proposed that the federal government, rather than private banks, should control the issuance of currency, was not merely de-prioritized, it was re-classified as a discredited fringe position, despite having elected governors, senators and representatives across 14 states in the 1870s and 1880s [supporting it];
– The Granger Movement’s documented record of railroad monopoly pricing against which prairie farmers had organized, and which had produced the Interstate Commerce Act of 1887 was reduced to a footnote;
– The National Banking Act of 1863, and what it had done to rural credit availability, was not taught at all;
– The chain of cause-and-effect connecting federal monetary decisions to farm foreclosure rates across the Great Plains, a chain that farmers themselves had understood well enough to build a national political movement around it was replaced with a narrative about “individual thrift” and “market efficiency” that contained no mechanism and no names. What replaced it was not wrong exactly: it was simply incomplete in ways that benefited specific people;
– The new curriculum taught that markets allocated resources efficiently when left alone. It taught that wages reflected the productive value of labor. It did not teach who decided what “productive value” meant, who set the conditions under which that determination was made, or what the documented historical record showed about what happened to wages when workers had no organized alternative. It taught the conclusion. It removed the evidence that had led prior generations to question that conclusion.
Edna Morse understood this precisely. In her letter (paraphrased due to transcription limitations by narrator) she writes that she had been teaching her students to read economic history the way she taught them to read any history: with primary sources, with documented cause-and-effect, with the understanding that someone always benefits from a policy decision and that identifying WHO benefits is the beginning of understanding why the decision was made.
She writes that she did not believe that it was her function as a teacher to protect her students from conclusions that made powerful people uncomfortable. She believed it was her function to teach them how to reach conclusions at all. The letter was written in October. She was dismissed in December.
Now, consider what was happening around her: In 1902, John D. Rockefeller established the General Education Board with an initial gift of One Million Dollars, eventually totaling $53 million over the following two decades. The stated mission was to promote education within the United States without distinction of race, sex or creed. The actual function — documented in the Board’s own published reports — was to coordinate and standardize American schooling along the lines that its founders considered appropriate for an industrial economy.
Frederick Gates, Rockefeller’s philanthropic advisor, wrote in 1906 that the object was to produce in the child a perfect knowledge of what he ought to do, and also the will to do it. He was describing the function of school. He was not describing the function that Edna Morse believed school served.
In 1905, Andrew Carnegie established the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, with $10 million. One of its first projects was a pension system for teachers. This is remembered as an act of generosity. What is less discussed is the condition attached: To qualify for the Carnegie pension, a college had to adopt specific curriculum standards that the foundation found acceptable. Curriculum control dressed as retirement security.
The teachers who taught the old economic history were aging out. The teachers who would replace them would be trained in institutions that had accepted Carnegie’s terms to secure Carnegie’s money. This was not a conspiracy in the dramatic sense: There were no secret meetings, no coded communications, no explicit agreement to suppress the truth. It was something more durable than a conspiracy, it was convergent interests: the men who funded the standardization of American education were the same men whose accumulated wealth the old economic curriculum explained, documented and questioned.
They did not need to coordinate; they needed only to fund.
Go back to Kansas, back to Osage County in the winter of 1901. Edna Morse knew her students. She had watched them grow up in farming communities where deflationary currency policy had foreclosed their parents’ land in the 1880s and 1890s, transferring it to eastern creditors at a fraction of its productive value. She had watched families lose in two years what had taken a generation to build, and she understood from the economic history she had been teaching WHY that had happened and WHO had designed the conditions that made it happen. And she understood that if her students never learned that history, they would have no framework for recognizing it when it happened again. They would have only the story that markets were natural, that outcomes were deserved, and that poverty persisted because of failures of individual character, rather than structural decisions made by people with names and addresses, and specific financial interests.
That is what she refused to stop saying. Not a theory, not an ideology, a documented pattern with named beneficiaries, available in historical records, traceable through congressional testimony and court filings, and the archived correspondence of the men who made the decisions.
She was not teaching radicalism. She was teaching the evidentiary standards she applied to everything else. Her students remembered her. That is the part that stays with me. Three of them wrote letters later in their lives, two of which have been located in county historical collections in Kansas. And they describe their teacher in nearly identical terms: They describe a woman who treated economic questions the same way she treated geological questions, or biological questions — as things that had answers and that the answers could be found if you knew where to look and what to look for. One of them writes that she was the only teacher he ever had that made him feel that the world could be understood. Not simplified. Not explained away. Understood.
He writes that, after she left, the new teacher was perfectly kind and perfectly useless in that specific way.
The students who sat in Edna Morse’s classroom in 1901 were born around 1888. They would have been in their early 20s during the panic of 1907 when J.P. Morgan essentially performed the function of a central bank by coordinating private capital to stop a financial collapse.
They would have been in their 30s when the Federal Reserve Act passed in 1913 (the legislative resolution of the monetary debate that their teacher had been forbidden to include in her curriculum). They would have watched with whatever framework they retained from those last years of the old curriculum the same mechanisms their teacher had documented play out at national scale. Whether they recognized what they were seeing depended entirely on whether Edna Morse had gotten to them before December of 1901.
The General Education Board published a document in 1913 titled “The Country School of Tomorrow.” In it, Frederick Gates writes with striking frankness that the aim of education is not to create independent thinkers, but to produce useful citizens who will perform the tasks society assigns them without friction. He did not use those exact words, but the document is publicly available and the meaning is not subtle: The goal was a population literate enough to follow instructions but not literate enough to question the instructions’ origins. The old economic curriculum was incompatible with that goal because it taught origins. It taught that instructions had authors with interests — and that the interests could be named.
There is a question I keep returning to: How many Edna Morse’s were there? How many schoolteachers in 1901, 1902 and 1903 received those new curriculum frameworks and looked at what had been removed, and understood immediately what the removal meant.
How many of them wrote letters to their superintendents? How many of those letters were preserved, and how many of those that were preserved have been read by anyone in the last fifty years
The Kansas State Historical Society has 1.4 million documents in its collection. They have been digitizing since 2003. Edna Morse’s letter became searchable in 2019. Before that it was in a folder labeled “Educator Correspondence Osage County, 1890 to 1910,” a folder that has been in the archive since 1948. Seventy years in a folder. And if there is one Edna Morse in Kansas, there are fifty more in Ohio and Indiana and Nebraska and Iowa, teachers who saw the curriculum change and understood what the change meant and wrote it down — because that is what teachers do: they write things down — and whose letters are sitting in state historical societies, and county courthouse basements and university special collections waiting for someone to look in the [correct] folder.
The economic history that was removed in 1901 did not disappear entirely. It survived in the letters of teachers who refused to accept the new frameworks without protest. It survived in the memories of students who remembered being taught to ask “Who benefits?” before accepting any explanation of how the world worked. And it survived in the documented record of what happened in the American economy in the decades that followed, a record that makes considerably more sense when you know what the curriculum that preceded it contained.
The archive is open. The documents are there. And somewhere in a folder that nobody has thought to check since 1948, a teacher is still trying to finish the lesson she was told to stop giving.
The last schoolteacher who taught the original history did not lose because she was wrong; she lost because what she was right about was inconvenient to people who had recently acquired the institutional capacity to determine what American children would and would not be taught. That capacity has not diminished. What has diminished is our memory of what was taken. And memory, unlike power, can be restored by anyone willing to open the right folder.
See the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uo87URQubs
Buried Century’s channel is here: https://www.youtube.com/@BuriedCenturyYT
Old World history (complete with incredible photos and videos) can be found here: https://nofakenews.net/?s=old+world
Information is vital. Share what you know.
Ashley Hayes is an investigative journalist documenting invisible crimes against humanity being perpetrated via mass propaganda, PsyOps, psychological torture, directed-energy, mass surveillance, remote neural weaponry, AI and nanotechnology by the secretive fusion centers/ private police and their leaders within the Military/Industrial/Intelligence/Law Enforcement/ Media/Pharmaceutical/Evangelical Complex in furtherance of their stated goal of a One World Government/One World Religion over a depopulated, enslaved America, as well the pandemic of child rape and child sex trafficking.
Help us spread the word!
Watch it tonight!
The Truth Told Through Fiction!
Do you honestly believe that Big Pharma wants to eradicate a $217 billion a year cancer industry?
Click on the images above to watch Target List
From the author of The Target List story
Coming May 2, 2026
Click here to read the author interview
HOLOGRAMS
From the author of The Target List story
Coming July 4th, 2026
Click here to read the author interview!
Become a Beta Reader!
If you’re interested in becoming a beta reader for John Reizer’s fictional stories, please send your email address via the NFN website’s contact page.
Beta readers receive free advance copies of selected new works in exchange for non-biased feedback or reviews.
The Truth Told Through Comedic Fiction!
A Feature Film
Curing Cancer Was A Mistake!
Click on the images below to Watch Target List
“Target List had me on the edge of my seat throughout. Not the least because of its believability!” — GARETH ICKE
– DIRECTOR OF THE DAVID ICKE WEBSITE
“… I believe in the future he could be esteemed as one of the prophets of science fiction. If you’re not familiar with John Reizer’s works, you should be.”
Click on the image below to visit the website!
NoFakeNews 