By Joseph Kellard
In reply, many people utter the dogma that education is too important to leave to the free market. Note, however, that food and clothing are indispensable, and on a free market supermarkets and department stores thrive, offering goods in substantial varieties, styles and sizes. Yet our nation¹s government-run educational system remains an essentially one-size-fits-all institution.
While public schools size themselves up against one another, some deemed ³excellent² based on this narrow standard, certain private schools are producing truly excellent results. And they do so primarily because they can break from the dictates of state-run schools and implement superior curriculums and teaching methods. (For an example, see vandammeacademy.com.)
True, parents are still free to enroll their children in private schools. But they are still taxed to finance public schools. And one notable injustice about such forced financing is that taxpayers may adamantly oppose the ideas propagated in public school curriculums.
Education should consist of teaching a child objective facts, ideas and reasoning skills, so that Johnny develops into an independent thinker. Ideas fundamentally shape every individual¹s life and world, and thus have enormous consequences. Teaching a child to believe in faith, self-sacrifice and an all-powerful state, or in reason, rational self-interest and individual rights, can be the difference between producing a proponent of an oppressive theocracy, like Taliban-led Afghanistan, or of an essentially free, capitalist, prosperous nation, such as the United States.
Observe that public schools preach ³diversity² as a virtual inherent good. Yet they are devoid of diverse ideas. Instead of producing inquisitive, independent thinkers, public schools have largely descended into indoctrination and groupthink. That is, before children are old enough to spell ³tree² and grasp certain complex ideas and issues, they are schooled in environmentalism, multiculturalism and moral relativism.
Now observe that individuals who disagree with these teachings must nevertheless finance them. Government has monopolized education, mainly by financing schools through our taxes. Moreover, religious to racial pressure groups join hands with bureaucrats to enact laws that, for example, demand that school curriculums conform to their particular ideologies. Then when schools fail, public education proponents¹ knee-jerk reaction is to pour more money into them, courtesy of your tax dollars.
In short, the public education monopoly is immune from going out of business. Meanwhile, educational quality continues to proportionally decline as spending rises, an inflation-adjusted 240 percent per pupil since 1960. And with ever-rising taxes, fewer parents can afford to pursue private options.
If schools were privatized, however, Americans would be unshackled from public education¹s tax burden and restrictive, politicized curriculums. This means, with their taxes in their pockets instead, more educators could afford to open more diverse schools, and parents could spend their savings on schools of their choice. This would inject desperately needed competition into education, as schools would either have to perform well or face going out of business. (Note that home-schooled students perform better than the national average, without professional teachers and at no expense to taxpayers.)
Further, religious parents, for example, could spend their taxes on schools that preach creationism, post the Ten Commandments in their classrooms and conduct prayers. ³Progressive² schools could continue to push everything from whole language to Ebonics, uphold aboriginal tribes as better than civilized, capitalist nations, and allege that man is stripping Mother Earth of all her resources. And pro-reason secularist could implement curriculums that teach evolution, phonics and that our Western, industrialized civilization is the greatest culture in history.
Finally, just as parents must plan to feed and clothe their children, they must also plan to finance their education. Living in freedom requires each individual assume self-responsibility. This means parents cannot expect to impose or force their responsibilities on any other individual. And a considerably less taxed and already benevolent American people would readily assist parents honestly unable to fully provide for their child¹s education.
Ultimately, a free educational system is the moral one, since, at root, it upholds each individual¹s right to keep and spend his hard-earned money as he sees fit.
So, as politicians and public educators tell us, as if it were our only alternative, that we must find other forms of taxation to finance schools, remind them there are alternatives growing in popularity that offer individuals more freedom and choices in education, from vouchers to tax credits. It¹s high time we Americans begin to seriously question the dogmas we¹ve all been taught about the supposed validity of the government monopoly that is public education.
