Children of the state
How government schools indoctrinate children to obey
Socialist ideology is the water in which we swim.
Almost all politicians (both left and right) seek to:
1. expand their control over our lives
2. seize ever increasing amounts of the citizen’s wealth
From birth to death, some bureaucrat dictates everything from the food we eat to the cars we drive, to the people we hire.
To be fair, some people do object to the growth of government power. And some politicians even profess a desire to cut spending and regulations.
But politicians not only routinely fail to cut spending, they fail to cut the _rate of increase_ of spending. The national debt is currently increasing by 1 trillion every 100 days. As of this writing, every citizen’s share of that debt amounts to around $110,000 per person.
Many industries labor under a heavy burden of regulation: medicine, housing, and the automotive industry, to name a few. The regulatory state has effectively strangled all of the following technologies/industries in the US:
* nuclear power
* super sonic aircraft
* human cloning
* human germline genetic engineering
* US shipbuilding
* light duty diesel trucks
* flying cars
* offshore aquaculture
All forms of media—music, games, TV, and movies—frequently portray businessmen as greedy, sociopathic villains.
For example, one of the main characters of the Fallout TV series is Cooper Howard, a Vault-Tec spokesmodel turned radioactive ghoul. At the suggestion that Vault-Tec deliberately fomented nuclear war in order to stimulate demand for its fallout shelters, Cooper retorts: “That’s called capitalism, Charlie!” “
Why is there so much enthusiasm for socialism? Why is there so much hostility to free markets?
How did socialism become so popular?
There are many contributors to the growth of socialism in the US, but one of the primary drivers has been the growth of government schools.
K-12 schools are mostly government run and dominated by the teacher's unions, which lean heavily Democrat. Universities too are almost wholly dominated by the left.
So, from the start, most children born in the US spend 6-8 hours per day for 12 - 16 years being steeped in socialist propaganda.
Government schools didn't exist in the US until the 1830's, and didn't become widespread until the 1860's. Early state-run schools were modeled after the Prussian military academies. Like the Prussian military academies, US government schools were created to indoctrinate children to be obedient citizens, loyal soldiers, and industrious factory workers.
And government schools continue to indoctrinate children to serve the state to this day.
The domination of US culture by socialist ideology has been so complete that both major parties typically express strong support for government schools. It’s hard for many people to even contemplate the possibility of a world without coercive government school monopolies.
Yes, Republicans will sometimes express support for school vouchers, home schooling, and private schools. And Republican support for consensual schooling increased substantially following the Covid 19 pandemic beginning in 2020. Many parents were horrified by the strong left wing bias they discovered in their child’s curriculum. Many were also angered by the arrogance of schoolteachers and their union reps, who demanded to be paid the same even though the schools were closed.
But Republicans are by no means consistent opponents to government schools. Where they dominate politically, they will often spend lavishly on government schools. For example, Republican city officials in Prosper, Texas spent $200 million on the Walnut Grove High School campus, whose amenities include:
* 530,000 square foot, two-story academic building
* 75,000 square foot Multi-Purpose building.
* 1,000 seat auditorium
* 2,200 seat arena
But as profligate as Republicans can sometimes be, the money and power they derive from government schools is dwarfed by the Democrats.
Democrats have turned government schools into the most powerful engine of their political machine. Democratic party members wholly dominate US government schools:
"Among English teachers, there are 97 Democrats for every three Republicans, with the proportion being even more one-sided among health teachers, with 99 Democrats for every one Republican.
While there are slightly more Republicans among math and science teachers, among high school teachers overall, there are 87 Democrats for every 13 Republicans."
Democratic control of the schools allows Democrats to forcibly indoctrinate other people's children with Democratic propaganda for 12 years.
In addition to indoctrinating schoolchildren to love the government, teachers also directly support pro-public school politicians with their money and time. Over 94% of teacher's union donations since 1990 have gone to the Democrats.
"Teachers unions have steadily amped up their political involvement: From 2004 to 2016, their donations grew from $4.3 million to more than $32 million -- an all-time high. Even more than most labor unions, they have little use for Republicans, giving Democrats at least 94 percent of the funds they contributed to candidates and parties since as far back as 1990, where our data begins."
Government schoolteachers overwhelmingly vote for Democrats.
"Forty one percent of [schoolteachers] described themselves as Democrats while another 30 percent said they were independents. Just 27 percent were Republicans."
Schoolteachers and their union reps often engage in blatant self-dealing. Schoolteachers help elect their union reps into state government. Union reps then return the favor by voting to increase state funding for teacher salaries—some of which is directed into the rep’s own pockets via compulsory union dues.
Public school advocates claim that government schools are necessary because a) an educated populace is necessary for a well-functioning democracy b) the poorest and most disadvantaged children would receive little or no schooling without government schools.
But are these claims true?
Even if one grants that it's good to have an educated populace, it does not follow that education should be provided by a state-run monopoly.
Imagine if we paid for food the way we pay for schools.
We don’t allow the government to monopolize grocery stores, clothing stores, or construction firms, yet we have a greater abundance of food, clothing, and housing at all price points than at any previous time in human history.
If the government didn’t have a monopoly on security, only rich people would be able to have security just like when the government got out of other businesses, the only cars produced were limousines, the only clothes produced were tuxedos and the only food produced was foie gras.
And historical evidence suggests that consensual schools were perfectly adequate to educate the populace before government schools became commonplace.
In his book, Literacy in Colonial New England, University of Montana scholar Kenneth Lockridge makes the case that
" … among white New England men, about 60 percent of the population was literate between 1650 and 1670, a figure that rose to 85 percent between 1758 and 1762, and to 90 percent between 1787 and 1795. In cities such as Boston, the rate had come close to 100 percent by century’s end."
Women’s literacy also increased dramatically over the same period. As Bard College’s Joel Perlmann and Boston College’s Dennis Shirley write:
“Half the women born around 1730 were illiterate; virtually all the women born around 1810 were literate.”
So, virtually all free men and women were literate by 1830, several decades before state-run schools became widespread.
But maybe government schools do a _better_ job than consensual schools?
Even if government schools aren’t _necessary_ for an educated populace, perhaps they do a better job nonetheless. Nationwide, inflation-adjusted education spending per student in the U.S. has increased by 302% since 1960:
1960: $4,521
1970: $7,130
1980: $9,048
1990: $12,320
2000: $14,308
2010: $16,962
2020: $18,183
Meanwhile standardized test scores remain flat.
Moreover, if government schools were doing such a great job, why do significant number of government schoolteachers send their kids to private schools? 21% of all urban school teachers send their kids to private schools, versus 17% of urban families, versus 12% of all families..
In addition, many pro-public school politicians send their kids to private schools.
If government schools don’t actually educate students very well, what is their true purpose?
Schools do teach kids to read and write. But as many home-schoolers discover, most children can learn the typical school curriculum in an hour or two per day.
Government schools actually serve to:
Inculcate students with a slave mentality that will make them easier to control as adults
Embed (often false) pro-government facts and theories into the minds of children.
Babysit children while the parents work.
How do government schools cultivate a slave mentality in their students?
Schools teach many lessons, not all of which are explicit. Many of the most important lessons are taught by how schools operate. Some of these “slave lessons” include:
* Your time is not your own. You must do what the authorities say, when they say it, regardless of your preferences.
* You have no right to privacy. Everything you say and do can and should be monitored by the authorities at all times.
* You have no freedom of speech. If you speak out of turn, say something verboten, or don't speak up when asked you will be punished.
* You have no right to leave. If you try to leave without permission, you will be forcibly returned, and what freedom you do have will be further curtailed.
* You have no right to choose your school. You will be assigned a school based on where you live. If you try to go somewhere else without permission you will be punished.
* You have no right to refuse payment, no matter how poor the quality of service.
* You have no right to choose your teachers.
* You have very limited choice over your coursework.
* You have no right to earn your own money. Anyone who tries to hire you will be punished.
* You have a duty to pay taxes. Taxes are morally good and society would not function without them.
* You belong to an evil class (men, white people, the "rich"). As a member of that class, you enjoy un-earned wealth from the misdeeds of your ancestors. It is therefore just that you be expropriated to compensate the descendants of those harmed by your ancestors.
* If you belong to a victim class (women, blacks, gay people) you have no agency, and no influence over the bad things that happen to you. Most of the bad things that happen to you are because you're being exploited by the people in the evil classes. You're therefore wholly justified in using state power to expropriate their funds, censor their speech, and control how and with whom they may associate.
* The 9/11 attacks happened because the terrorists are evil people with immoral values. They had no reason to be angry with our government, and their attacks were wholly unjustified. By contrast, the invasions, bombing campaigns, torture and mass starvation perpetrated by our military are merely the unfortunate, but necessary effects of our legitimate need to defend ourselves.
* Businessmen only make money by exploiting the working class.
* Rich people only have wealth because they unjustly exploit their workers and their customers.
* Unions work for the benefit of the poor, immigrants, and the working man.
* The election system is fair and not rigged. It's just a coincidence that the Democrat/Republican duopoly has dominated almost every election, in every state, for the last 150+ years.
How can we achieve separation of school and state? How can we create schools based on consent instead of coercion?
If schools were based wholly on mutual consent by everyone involved: students, parents, teachers, and citizenry, what would they look like?
Wholly consensual education would likely take many forms, but they would follow the same basic principles:
No one would be forced to attend schools based on where their house is located. Parents would be able to choose where they send their children for schooling.
No one would be extorted to pay for schools. Schools would be funded by voluntary payments or donations instead.
No one would would get to indoctrinate other people's children without their consent. (A nice side benefit is that there would be much less political fighting over the school curriculum.)
Richard Vedder's book "Can Teacher's Own Their Own Schools" explains how schools can go from coercion to consent.
In brief, Vedder proposes to:
gift the state schools to their current administrators and educators
end all coercive tax subsidies for education.
Once freed of state shackles, schools will likely adopt a variety of organizational structures.
For example, in progressive communities, many schools might become democratically controlled, worker owned cooperatives.
Progressive co-ops could teach progressive ideas in peace, as all student/parents must voluntarily buy into the schools moral and educational philosophy.
Likewise, for libertarians/conservatives/independents. We would all be able to support the schools we like, and refuse support for the schools we don't like.
Does the vision of consensual schools sound appealing to you? If so here’s a few ways you can help make it happen:
Sign up for my newsletter.
Run for office on a school divestiture platform.
Set up education trusts to pay for private school / homeschool scholarships.
Home school your children.
Enroll your kid micro-schools such as Prenda Academy and Acton Academy.
Enroll your children in school alternatives such as Moonrise.