By Greg Kay Mirrored with permission -article originally published by Mr. Kay: 12 September, 2000
Public schools are a hot political topic; they are the number one concern of the soccer mom set, their funding, location, and consolidation brings on vicious battles in counties and communities, and even in Washington, and we constantly hear about the need for more teachers, more money to pay them, and new methods and mandates.
Meanwhile, Johnny still can’t read. Moreover, Johnny is dumb and getting dumber.
School, bus rides, and homework assignments now can easily take up 14-16 hours a day. On the journey to and from school and while he is there in class, Johnny is forcibly associated with drug users, perverts, people with communicable diseases, robbers, rapists, and sometimes even murderers. He is exposed to many teachers who intentionally and callously deny and undermine everything his family believes in, and his massive homework assignments eliminate any time for meaningful interaction with his own family.
That’s a lot of stress on a kid, but if Johnny can’t cope, we’ll give Johnny dope. After all, just because Johnny is stressed, we can’t expect the teacher to be stressed too, and we certainly can’t allow any disruption to the routine. Now she can do her job more easily, because Johnny’s stoned out of his mind on Ritalin.
Of course, Johnny still can’t read, and there is sometimes a rather disturbing side effect to all this better living through chemistry: occasionally, Johnny becomes a drugged-out psycho stalking the hallways and cafeterias with a gun.
To answer that, we have to consider the unthinkable: what if the free, compulsory public school was a flawed idea from the very beginning?
At least one highly educated man thought so: Dr. Robert L. Dabney, Presbyterian theologian and adjutant to General Thomas J. “Stonewall” Jackson.
When the compulsory public school system first came to Dixie as part of the reeducation program of Reconstruction, the man sometimes called “the Virginia Prophet” had the sagacity to recognize its intrinsic faults immediately. He pointed out that, for one thing, the public school system is one of the main vehicles for the socialist redistribution of wealth; wealth that is confiscated from one area and sent to another. He further predicted that the States would become addicted to that wealth, just as the parent would become addicted to the abdication of his or her responsibilities and obligations to educate his child.
Don’t believe it? Watch a school funding battle sometime. The public education system is the one, single, sacred cow in the budget, absolutely untouchable under penalty of political death. The depth of this addiction is evidenced by the demagoguery of its defense: namely the emotionally appealing and utterly illogical suggestion that anyone willing to take a dollar from school budgets, let alone question the very value and necessity of the system, is against children. On the contrary, as we shall see, that person may just be the greatest advocate and best friend that the children ever had.
Secondly, and Dabney addressed this issue as well, school is a place where the best and brightest of society are confined in forced association with its lowest elements, putting good children not only in physical danger, but even more so in moral danger, as they pick up the foul habits, the amoral views, and the degeneracy of their new ‘peers.’ Of course, if the child is a bit slow on blending in with his classmates, the teacher is there to help, and will make those views that the child might otherwise reject through the filter of parental instruction or twinge of conscience acceptable by making them part of the curriculum. Following intensive indoctrination on ‘tolerance’, ‘values clarification’, and ‘multiculturalism’, you may rest assured that little Johnny will fit right in with the rest of new companions, however evil and perverse they may be.
That the parent may be alarmed at such a radical change in their offspring is of no importance. You see, the teacher does not work for the parent, nor for the child. The teacher works for the State. In one of his most succinct observations, Dr. Dabney pointed out that the teacher, like the sheriff, is an agent of the government that signs their paychecks, and their purpose is to carry out the assigned duties of that government. And in that endeavor, regardless of whether Johnny can read or not, the public schools have been a tremendous success.
THE PURPOSE OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS
Public schools were never intended to produce educated individuals - they were designed to produce loyal, malleable citizens who knew enough to be productive but not enough to be a problem. Compulsory public education is a government tool, the school is the factory, and the cookie-cutter, made to order citizen is the product.
It was that way during its inception in Sparta, when it produced exactly the type of citizens the Spartans required; implacable male soldiers and eager mothers to bear more of them. It did the job during its tenure in Prussia, beginning in 1806 after that nation’s defeat by Napoleon; a defeat that the Prussians believed was largely brought about by soldiers thinking for themselves instead of blindly following orders. During the (first) Reconstruction, it was a government tool of the Yankees, forced upon the South under the idea that "if children read the same books, study the same subjects, then there can be no rebellion, when our youths learn to read similar books, similar lessons, we will become one person, possessing one organic nationality." It worked fairly well, although Southerners never wholly bought into it and many of them have come to practice a sort of schizophrenic "double-think": revering their ancestors while vehemently rejecting everything they believed in. However, the brainwashing was effective enough to keep the South from rising again - so far.
Now the schools are used to enforce the doctrine of a misnamed "tolerance" that is actually acceptance of concepts that the government favors and rejection of those it does not, regardless of any real evidence to the contrary and no matter how outrageous. Such contrary evidence is not allowed, and it finds its way in, it is pathologized, persecuted, and hounded relentlessly, with its most stubborn adherents ridiculed, punished, or even removed from the system all together if they fail to accept the established dogma, lest they contaminate the others; not with their ideas, but with their ability to think of the ideas.
The duty of the public educator (Consciously or unconsciously - he is a product of the educational - industrial complex too.) is to guide the students' thoughts in certain patterns until they wear a rut in the mind - a rut so deep that in becomes nearly impossible for the stream of thought to leave that channel. If it cannot be done through rote and through standard brainwashing techniques, it is done through chemical restraints, the educator's latest tool. Between four and six million students in public school are now on heavy, mind-altering drugs: legally, in order to make them compliant (That number includes every one of the perpetrators of the infamous school shootings, which begs the question: were they on drugs because they were psychotic, or were they psychotic because they were on drugs?).
In order to create the compliant citizen, the child must be separated from the parents until he comes to regard the State and its agents as the parental unit and ultimate authority. In ancient Sparta, it was a physical separation; today, it is a separation of authority, morality, religion, race, and culture as well as physically, and the physical part is increasing as long bus rides and hours of work that should have been completed in class are handed out, thus further limiting the interaction with the parents to almost nothing. When someone spends the vast majority of their waking hours in the control of the State, the State then becomes the most important part of his life, replacing the parent.
He is also being conditioned to, without thinking, freely give of his time with little complaint to the demands of his employer, for whom he will later work, no matter how unreasonable those demands may become. The finished product of a successful public education is a citizen in name only; in reality, he is part of a hive. He produces and he doesn't question seriously except within the set safe parameters to which he has been conditioned, let alone rebel in an effective manner. When that happens, the public school system has done its job.
For every problem, no matter how complex, there is solution. Sometimes that solution may be a gradual change; at others, the change must be more radical. When faced with the Gordian knot of the public educational system, we must emulate Alexander and cut it asunder. Then we can finally begin to educate our children.
How, you ask, are we to do this if there are no more schools? It’s very simple – we make the schools. We can’t make the educational silk purse out of the proverbial sow’s ear of public education; instead, we must begin with the finest cloth available: that of parental love and responsibility.
According to the laws of God Almighty, children belong to the parents; not to the “global village”, not to the Federal Government, and not even to the State, and in the face of God’s law, all contrary laws and strictures are to be damned and dismissed as null and void, as they are issued from a much lesser body, contrary to what that body’s legislators would have us believe.
Thus, in this bold new paradigm of loving education of over political indoctrination, carried out through parental responsibility, the parent has not one choice, but three. All will require work on their part, but then anything worthwhile does.
Probably the least desirable choice, although it can be adequate, is private school. One is found that most closely approximates the beliefs and desires of the parent, the tuition is paid and the child is enrolled. Even though such a school will never be perfect, it is generally far better than public school because the teachers and administrators work not for a government entity, but for the parents.
The second choice is still not ideal, although it is very good and, like the private schools, it is time-proven: namely, community schools. Community schools are just what the name implies: schools run by the community. The parents of the local children democratically select the location, decide on the curriculum, either hire a teacher or have certain members of their group teach it themselves, and pay for it all. In this case, since the control is on the neighborhood level, while it is not tailored to the individual it at will least express the general culture, views and morals of the students’ families.
The last choice is and always has been the best – home schooling. People, including children, are individuals with different personalities and talents, and the home school is tailored directly to the individual by the person who knows that individual the best: the parent. Every strength and weakness of the child can be taken into consideration, and the curriculum tailored to fit the child, rather than tailoring the child to fit the curriculum. Additionally, home schooling has the added advantage of being taught, not by an employee of a governmental agency who will get paid regardless, but by someone who has a real, vested interest in the development and welfare of the child.
Is the abandonment of the public education in favor of private schools, community schools, and home schools the perfect system? No; nor can any system created by man be perfect. What it is, however, is a much better system; a system controlled, not by distant government officials, but by the parents; and a system centered around the education of the child, not the indoctrination of a human product for the good of the State.