I’ve written frequently decrying what’s going on in government run schools—so-called “public” schools—across the country, especially the way they’ve been used to advance the Prog agenda to secularize American society.
"The U.S. was founded in an era when almost all schooling was private and religious" and prior to compulsory public schooling, the US was ranked as the most educated.
Instead, the goal is to produce compliant subjects of the Progressive state" Indeed, the public education system was purpose designed.
I like to talk about this issue in terms of "Separation of School and State". The limited government of a free republic should have no business whatsoever in funding or administering schools, certifying teachers, formulating standardized tests, or any of that. The parallels to the familiar principle of "Separation of School and Church" should be clear.
But back in the real world, where we're already some miles down the wrong road, I point people at resources like https://www.publicschoolexit.com, and tell them that there's no free lunch and if they're not the customers, they're the product. That's just common sense.
LOL, I meant "Separation of Church and State", of course. If you want your church to run your schools, I don't think the Founding Fathers or I would quibble with that.
I think the thing we often miss in this conversation is that every state has the legal means and ability to tell the feds to pound salt and go their own way. That applies to everything from roadways to education...
They simply choose not to... The free government crack of unchecked borrowed endless dollars keep everyone of them in line with federal "progress".
So who do we fault here? A federal government operating in our states schools or the state that welcomes them?
Checking over the Constitution, you will not find education or healthcare in there as an enumerated power. 10th Amendment should leave both under jurisdiction of the states, as it was for a long, long time.
While homeschoolers who have to pay for their own efforts, also subsidize the others. I've created a header for this page, if you'd like to use it let me know.
I paid heavily to send our four kids to private schools while also paying heavily--highest prop taxes in the country--to send other people's kids to be indoctrinated in secularism at gov't schools. People whose kids I subsidized thought that was somehow fair and good and now tell me they were satisfied with that arrangement. I found out during the Covid Regime just how extensive a meals program the "public schools" were also running. No kids in those schools but they were still open to hand out "free" meals. In a fairly affluent town.
Yup. Right up the street from me, they hand them out all summer, too. The education they give is one thing, the way they treat individuals in another. I homeschooled my grandkids. The oldest in first grade was labeled with every imaginable problem, and treated like a freak by the teaching staff. Given a homeschool curriculum, he was a fabulous student, nothing wrong with him, and when he tried again in 8th grade, his grades were exemplary, and they threw him out for having a knife to cut his bread, because he has food allergies. He was a head taller than everyone else his age. They assumed he was a dunce.
Public schools once stressed assimilation into the American project. Most people believed that this was critical to social cohesion given our broad spectrum of national origins. It has only been in the past 60 years that assimilation was supplanted by multicultural atomization. Sure, there were issues on the margins about public schools being advantaged over parochial schools, but on the whole most American public school parents were satisfied enough with the curriculum until the Marxists got their noses under the tent. Two working parent families--and increasingly one parent families--turned over more of their parental responsibilities to school administrators who were only too happy to fill the gap with highly secular ideas coming out of radical schools of education.
Maybe public schools have always been unconstitutional, but it seems to me that it has only been since they began venturing into leftist propaganda that they lost value to society.
"Public schools once stressed assimilation into the American project."
Correct--IF you think that KKK, Know Nothingism, and Progressivism embody the American project. And that Catholics are by definition excluded from American public life.
These are the people who opposed William Seward's tolerant approach to education:
Okay, then. That sure wasn't my Catholic experience in the 1950's and 1960's at even Palo Alto's progressive schools where we said the Pledge of Allegiance daily K-8, had to pass a test on the Constitution to enter high school, and were taught that there was nothing more vile than the KKK.
Look: I thought little enough of government school progressive curricula that all my kids attended Catholic and private schools. I just thought the KKK and Know Nothings reference was a just a bit over the top. Peace out.
How about the "KKK, Know Nothingism, AND PROGRESSIVISM" reference? I'm inclusive if nothing else. And the historical references are accurate. And that history--well known to students of the period--happens to be coming from a Jewish scholar of the Administrative State who teaches in the Ivy Leagues, not a Catholic. Consider reconsidering your assumptions.
That's a very simplistic response. In 1960, to offer just one example, JFK had to assure the nation that his "religion" wouldn't affect his presidency. The idea of a "wall of separation" was by then deeply ingrained--despite having zero constitutional warrant. Secularization can be taught to kids without explicit words. One example.
"The U.S. was founded in an era when almost all schooling was private and religious" and prior to compulsory public schooling, the US was ranked as the most educated.
Instead, the goal is to produce compliant subjects of the Progressive state" Indeed, the public education system was purpose designed.
The short version: https://youtu.be/HZp7eVJNJuw
The long version: https://youtu.be/WpycMRTBrfY
I like to talk about this issue in terms of "Separation of School and State". The limited government of a free republic should have no business whatsoever in funding or administering schools, certifying teachers, formulating standardized tests, or any of that. The parallels to the familiar principle of "Separation of School and Church" should be clear.
But back in the real world, where we're already some miles down the wrong road, I point people at resources like https://www.publicschoolexit.com, and tell them that there's no free lunch and if they're not the customers, they're the product. That's just common sense.
Yes!
LOL, I meant "Separation of Church and State", of course. If you want your church to run your schools, I don't think the Founding Fathers or I would quibble with that.
I think the thing we often miss in this conversation is that every state has the legal means and ability to tell the feds to pound salt and go their own way. That applies to everything from roadways to education...
They simply choose not to... The free government crack of unchecked borrowed endless dollars keep everyone of them in line with federal "progress".
So who do we fault here? A federal government operating in our states schools or the state that welcomes them?
Checking over the Constitution, you will not find education or healthcare in there as an enumerated power. 10th Amendment should leave both under jurisdiction of the states, as it was for a long, long time.
However, you WILL find freedom of speech as an enumerated Right:
But Pierce says that parents can educate their children outside state
schools in accord with the parents’ moral and religious views.
Although the exact nature of this parental freedom is much disputed, it is grounded in the
First Amendment. When religious parents claim the freedom, religious liberty seems an
especially strong foundation. **But the freedom of parents in educating their children
belongs to all parents, not only the faithful. Freedom of speech more completely explains
this educational liberty.**
**Education consists mostly in speech to and with children. Parents enjoy freedom of
speech in educating their children, whether at home or through private schooling.** That is
the principle underlying Pierce, and it illuminates our current conundrum.
**The public school system, BY DESIGN, pressures parents to substitute government
educational speech for their own. Public education is a benefit tied to an unconstitutional
condition. Parents get subsidized education on the condition that they accept government
educational speech in lieu of home or private schooling.**
While homeschoolers who have to pay for their own efforts, also subsidize the others. I've created a header for this page, if you'd like to use it let me know.
I paid heavily to send our four kids to private schools while also paying heavily--highest prop taxes in the country--to send other people's kids to be indoctrinated in secularism at gov't schools. People whose kids I subsidized thought that was somehow fair and good and now tell me they were satisfied with that arrangement. I found out during the Covid Regime just how extensive a meals program the "public schools" were also running. No kids in those schools but they were still open to hand out "free" meals. In a fairly affluent town.
Yup. Right up the street from me, they hand them out all summer, too. The education they give is one thing, the way they treat individuals in another. I homeschooled my grandkids. The oldest in first grade was labeled with every imaginable problem, and treated like a freak by the teaching staff. Given a homeschool curriculum, he was a fabulous student, nothing wrong with him, and when he tried again in 8th grade, his grades were exemplary, and they threw him out for having a knife to cut his bread, because he has food allergies. He was a head taller than everyone else his age. They assumed he was a dunce.
Wow! Good for you!
You want the header? I tried to stick it in a comment but that didn’t work. Might look nice…up to you. Playing with old software
Public schools once stressed assimilation into the American project. Most people believed that this was critical to social cohesion given our broad spectrum of national origins. It has only been in the past 60 years that assimilation was supplanted by multicultural atomization. Sure, there were issues on the margins about public schools being advantaged over parochial schools, but on the whole most American public school parents were satisfied enough with the curriculum until the Marxists got their noses under the tent. Two working parent families--and increasingly one parent families--turned over more of their parental responsibilities to school administrators who were only too happy to fill the gap with highly secular ideas coming out of radical schools of education.
Maybe public schools have always been unconstitutional, but it seems to me that it has only been since they began venturing into leftist propaganda that they lost value to society.
"Public schools once stressed assimilation into the American project."
Correct--IF you think that KKK, Know Nothingism, and Progressivism embody the American project. And that Catholics are by definition excluded from American public life.
These are the people who opposed William Seward's tolerant approach to education:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_H._Seward
Okay, then. That sure wasn't my Catholic experience in the 1950's and 1960's at even Palo Alto's progressive schools where we said the Pledge of Allegiance daily K-8, had to pass a test on the Constitution to enter high school, and were taught that there was nothing more vile than the KKK.
See also:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blaine_Amendment
(esp the section on state amendments)
See in particular:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_H._Seward#Governor_of_New_York
Look: I thought little enough of government school progressive curricula that all my kids attended Catholic and private schools. I just thought the KKK and Know Nothings reference was a just a bit over the top. Peace out.
How about the "KKK, Know Nothingism, AND PROGRESSIVISM" reference? I'm inclusive if nothing else. And the historical references are accurate. And that history--well known to students of the period--happens to be coming from a Jewish scholar of the Administrative State who teaches in the Ivy Leagues, not a Catholic. Consider reconsidering your assumptions.
Look up "Peace out," Mark.
That's a very simplistic response. In 1960, to offer just one example, JFK had to assure the nation that his "religion" wouldn't affect his presidency. The idea of a "wall of separation" was by then deeply ingrained--despite having zero constitutional warrant. Secularization can be taught to kids without explicit words. One example.