I konow what the traits are. I asked why do you believe your son to be Indigo?

And what traits do Indigos have that are NOT shared by other people?

To me, what is described as Indigo describes as well children who are either unsocialized, definitely children who are not institutionalized...
IE- it is just as much a matter of early training and parental attitudes as it is anything else.

MOST of us are frustrated by ritual oriented systems, are bored with assigned tasks, and I thought it was an established fact that guilt trips don't "work."

Strong self esteem is constantly undermined in these children. In the Indigo book, in fact, self-esteem is listed as a PROBLEM Indigos face when dealing with the institution of school.

EVERYone is special and NOBODY should be made to learn.

Indigo is a gratuitous distinction made by people who don't want to help their children develop self-discipline.
Nothing you've posted has contradicted this viewpoint.

Prove me wrong. ;)

I appreciate your ideas-esp. equating 'tolerance' of 'the spoiled rotten brat' w/the 'indigo' idea.
i get what you are saying,but i'm not sure if you do. The label 'spoiled rotten brat' implies your own assessment of particular behaviors or traits as well as the reaction to these behaviors or traits by adults. The term spoiled can only be defined by and through an interpersonal relationship-usually one between a child and an adult.
Further, 'spoiled' in my eyes has to do with false gratification that many children would like b/c,as you correctly stated,we live in a speed culture and a consumerist one,at that. [Have you seen the BBC documentary about the rise of P.R. in America? Freud's nephew using Freud's ideas to drive a culture of 'desire' instead of 'need'? and create a 'consumer' out of 'citizens'?]
The Indigo concept talks about a shift into relating to children as actual equal human beings-which is NOT the same as them 'getting their way all the time' as one might define 'spoiled'.Rather,it is about seeing that a child 'wanting what they want and saying so',is not a bad thing in and of itself,and is not something to be quelched. [the actual wanting and expression of the self,that is. the actual responding to the want or expression is the role of the recipient-parent,teacher,etc.]
I really think you have two different concepts intertwined,and it dillutes the important information that you add to the conversation.
I have extensive experience with Indigo reading,more than just one book,as there are multiple perspectives. I am also an alternative health provider,and have worked extensively with both the subconscious and human energy fields. [which,i guess,you would HAVE to believe in physics then. Though I'm not sure you'd HAVE to believe in either evolution OR alien manipulation]. At any rate,there are definitely distinct human energy fields,including aura colors,that are discernable to the eye,when trained. Most are not trained in this,and in fact [of course] schooling is an attempt to unschool any such perceptual skills-including the blowing leaves on a tree,or the clouds swirling into pictures in the sky. All natural perceptual skills we are born with,as we are part of our natural environment,innately.
I also have a 6 yr old,and am headlong into the recognition of exactly what Gatto is talking about.And,since nearly all of the children today are Indigo (or crystal,rainbow,etc.)in terms of vibrational frequency,the reality is that our deconstruction of public schooling is coming at exactly the right time. The point of Indigos [and there are many indigo adults who were without the company of supportive and understanding adults during their childhood] is that they are here to assist in the breakdown of all societal structures,political,educational,familial-as we have known them,throughout all cultures. It's a new time.
And,I did not read this information; i experienced it first and then came across the information,which is what many are doing.
My point is that the Indigo concept is,as you suggested,definitely still another label,and one that may help some children be unschooled. Agreed. And this is a good thing. However, to relegate all change in human consciousness to simply a change in definition from spoiled to indigo,is more than simplistic in my mind. And it does a disservice to the discussion. You state that we are not so different in mindset from the middle aged mind. I wonder how you reconcile 'what came first,the chicken or the egg?' Because clearly if any old culture can take a child and raise them to create that culture's psyche,there must be an answer for how all of these different cultures came into existence to begin with? If so,I would like to know.
If not,then I would ask that you spend more time contemplating your theories,instead of stringing together a few answered questions and stating them as fact. Your critical thinking needs some fine tuning,because you have some important ideas w/in the mix.

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Replying to:

I recently read the Indigo Children book-
The authors make a VERY CLEAR DISTINCTION between Indigo and attention deficit and even go so far as to assert- erroneously- that there are children who "need" drugs to function.

The US leads the world in the consumption of most speeds. I would attribute the insane rise in attention deficit to a new idea that children should be able to be warehoused, should be raised by neither parent, and with the RAMPANT use of stimulants in our society.

I have seen pregnant woman after pregnant woman sucking down Diet Pepsi like it's the water they ought to be drinking, the eighties to which you refer regarding the high number of attention deficit children was also an era of RAMPANT cocaine use through all levels of society, and also saw the boom of the gourmet COFFEE industry.

To buy into the Indigo theory you have to buy into two ideas I've satisfactorily proven to myself to be false-

To buy into the Indigo theory one first must believe in evolution, and to buy into it full bore, one must believe in alien intervention in this evolution.

Additionally, all that sets so-called Indigos apart from your ordinary every day somewhat (or severely) spoiled child is a "genius" or special aptitude in some area- any area-

Which requires buying into a theory that genius is NOT as common as dirt. That would be a fine position to hold probably anywhere but the Gatto board.

Even if I were an evolutionist, which I am not, I would be smart enough to see the connection between the use of stimulants in a society and the short little spans of attention of that society's children- that should be a no-brainer but apparently isn't-

And as I DO believe genius is as common as dirt, I couldn't possibly see an above average aptitude in some area or another as setting a child apart as evolutionarily special.

As to the shift to the industrial age from the middle ages- you're missing about four hundred years in there- and no, I do not believe there was a hereditary shift in consciousness or psyche.

It is to my mind unmitigated hooey to state that people have some kind of different consciousness that has been initiated by anything but the society in which they live and various direct influences in their lives.

The mediaeval mind isn't really that different from our own. Put a young modern American into mediaeval Europe and you will soon have a mediaeval European, just as if you take a young person from anywhere in the world and raise him or her here, you will soon have a modern American.

I found some useful information in the Indigo Children book, and if it stops some hard-nosed authoritarian from tormenting even one poor child who'd be better off unschooled, it has been a good thing.

Unfortunately, it seems to undo as much as it does in appearing to promote the idea that spoiled rotten brats are simply more evolved than the rest of us and so we should tolerate their nonsense.