ext_306469 (![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png)
paft.livejournal.com) wrote in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png)
talkpolitics2011-07-16 10:14 am
paft.livejournal.com) wrote in talkpolitics2011-07-16 10:14 am
Entry tags:
They Could Always Go Work in Factories
Teri Adams, Head of Independence Hall Tea Party and School Voucher Activist:
Our ultimate goal is to shut down public schools and have private schools only, eventually returning responsibility for payment to parents and private charities. It’s going to happen piecemeal and not overnight. It took us years to get into this mess and it’s going to take years to get out of it.
In other words, Adams would like education to be, along with medical care, available only to those who can pony up the cash for it.
The article I’ve linked to includes a few quotes from people speculating about what drives the American right’s hostility towards public education. The ban on teacher-led prayer is invoked, along with the mercenary desire to funnel the money now paid into public schools into private hands.
I suspect it’s much more simple than that. Without universal education, the far right wouldn’t have to contend with so many pesky arguments about the facts of history, math, science, etc.
Crossposted from Thoughtcrimes
*
no subject
I think it ultimately derives from the Religious Right, and more so than that from the "sola scriptura" doctrine. The idea that the Bible is the sole source of religious truth has developed into a deeply held suspicion towards any sort of book or learning that doesn't directly relate to the Bible. Add to this the basic secularism of the public school system and I think it's fairly easy to see why they're so hostile.
The other factor is the rather shaky basis for faith that many fundamentalists have. Even though they claim sola scriptura, many of them have read very little of the Bible and get their doctrines of faith more from preachers than from the Bible itself. When it comes to opposing viewpoints, they don't want to learn about them and evaluate them, or even learn about them in order to discredit them. They would rather simply not learn about them at all. This attitude extends to their children -- they do not want to expose their children to an environment where they will question their faith. To them, questioning your faith is the road to hell, not a road to a stronger faith. One wonders what they would make of Thomas Aquinas.
Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Utter emotionalism. Also, your speculations are self-serving fantasies. It is the public system which is failing and producing spectacles of ignorance and miseducation, not private education.
Considering what you've written, more fundamentally, even including the extent that people teach what they know out of their own time and resources, as charity or other benevolence, education will always be available "only to those who can pony up the cash for it." Education is a service provided out of human leisure; it does not fall out of the sky on people like rain. It is only a question of how the "cash" is obtained: through force and coercion or through persuasion and free trade.
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
...
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
(no subject)
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
...
...
...
...
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
...
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
...
...
...
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
...
...
...
...
...
...
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
...
...
...
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
...
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
...
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
(no subject)
(no subject)
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
Re: Public education is political indoctrination paid for by theft
...
...
...
...
no subject
So they'll simply abolish them and it will all fade away. It's such a terribly Marxist idea.....
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
Free Market Follies
ARGENTINA: A GRAND EXPERIMENT IN WATER PRIVATIZATION THAT FAILED (http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/deadinthewater/argentina.html)
Re: Free Market Follies
no subject
The ban on teacher-led prayer is invoked, along with the mercenary desire to funnel the money now paid into public schools into private hands.
The former, yes, but the latter no. It's not about trying to "funnel the money" into private hands, but funneling the money away from the public black hole.
I suspect it’s much more simple than that. Without universal education, the far right wouldn’t have to contend with so many pesky arguments about the facts of history, math, science, etc.
Looking at the test scores and results of the ever-expanding public schooling, the right is losing that battle while still having the facts on their side. Facts being pesky like that and all.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
...
(no subject)
...
...
...
...
...
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
no subject
They say what they want, but there's zero consideration for what will actually happen if their fanciful libertarian utopia came to fruition.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
...
(no subject)
(no subject)
...
...
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
...
...
...
(no subject)
(no subject)
...
...
...
...
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
Wow! You could fertilize...
Re: Wow! You could fertilize...
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
(no subject)
We've heard that kind of statement before:
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
...
...
...
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
(no subject)
(no subject)
...
...
...
(no subject)
no subject
Y U NO MAKE SENSE AMERICA?
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
...
...
...
...
(no subject)
(no subject)
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
In other words, Adams would like education to be, along with medical care, available only to those who can pony up the cash for it.
If the alternative is a system where getting a decent education requires sending children to private schools, what's the difference? At least this way, reducing the enormous expense of an ineffective public system would leave some money in parents' pockets so they could afford to pony up some cash for their children's education.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
...
...
...
...
no subject
You know what life was like before the FDA? There were many ketchup competitors, and they all used moldy tomatoes to create their moldy ketchup. One of the first things the Pure Food And Drug Act, the Act that essentially created the FDA in June 30th, 1906 by Theodore Roosevelt, addressed was moldy ketchup.
A few years later the company began selling ketchup, and much of their marketing focused on the fact that Heinz ketchup did not contain any rotten tomatoes—in stark contrast to many of their competitors. A relatively recent publicity piece about Heinz claims that “Henry Heinz recognized before most of his peers that pure food is not only good for you, but is also good business,” but the truth is that Heinz’ promise of a safe product was not itself sufficient to capture the ketchup market. By the start of the Twentieth Century, Heinz was a major ketchup producer, but so were several companies who padded their bottom line by mixing rancid tomatoes into their product.
Seeing an opportunity, Heinz joined the chorus of scientists, consumer advocates and government officials who were clamouring for federal oversight of the processed food industry, even sending future Heinz CEO Howard Heinz to lobby President Theodore Roosevelt in favor of a the Pure Food and Drug Act, which prohibited some of the processed food industry’s most revolting practicies and gave enforcement authority to the agency which would later become the FDA. In 1906 the Act passed, and most of Heinz competitors were pushed out of business.
Because Heinz was one of only a handful of major ketchup producers who were already in the business of mass producing ketchup solely from fresh tomatoes, they quickly capitalized on the vacuum that formed as the rancid ketchup industry collapsed. Heinz became the market leader, and it remains so today.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_Food_and_Drug_Act
http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/libertarians-are-dumb-or-why-we-eat-heinz-ketchup/blog-298247/?page=2
So basically when someone advocates a libertarian worldview, a good question to ask them is, "Why do you want me to eat moldy ketchup?"
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
...
(no subject)
...
(no subject)
(no subject)
...
...
...
...
...
...
(no subject)
...
...
...
...
no subject
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
...
...
...
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
no subject
I'm making a new thread for this, because it's so funny. This is the exact same argument that socialists make. People naturally want to work and do the best that they can! People inherently want to help each other and bring up society to their level! Everyone is so altruistic and benevolent, how can socialism possibly fail?