This brief survey is intended to bring a representative sampling of the kind of extreme rhetoric and ideological language found in the writings of school privatization proponents. It is not a scientific survey, and is intended only to alert the reader to the level of intensity and ideological involvement that is typical of people and organizations involved in this movement.
Note: Bold font within quotations or quotation reference sources is emphasis added by the authors.
“
These are terms frequently used to describe public education with a negative slant. Following are some examples of how these terms are used by the Right..
“The term public implies that these schools are owned by, serve and answer to the public. Rev. Moore argues that this is just plain false, and we should not allow those running them to maintain the masquerade. We should always use phrases such as government schools or state-sponsored schools, in contrast with private or Christian schools operating independently of government and answering those they serve, not government bureaucrats. [. . .] There are, of course, no references to education in the Constitution, and no reason to think the Framers considered education a federal responsibility. Rev. Moore goes further, arguing that we are dealing with a "renegade school system," its roots not in any American or Christian tradition but in continental European collectivism and pagan state-worship. [. . .] We can only expect that a man-centered philosophy would be at home in government schools modeled on the same basic philosophical underpinnings that also eventually gave us Marxism-Leninism.”
Stephen Yates, "
Yates is at Ludwig von Mises Institute, receives funding from Bradley and Earhart foundations[116]
“Government schools are established by law. Elected and appointed public officials nominally have authority over them. In practice, however, actual authority is typically exercised by professional bureaucrats and the teachers' unions.”
Milton & Rose D. Friedman Foundation[117]
Receives funding from Scaife, Bradley[118]
“ ‘They're called public schools, but that's a misnomer. They're government schools,’ [Friedman noted. [. . .] Friedman did acknowledge the problem libertarians have even with vouchers. "Is a voucher government money? Of course it is," he said. Ultimately, he doesn't want vouchers at all. Instead he wants a "world of lower taxes" in which parents assume the responsibility for educating their own children, with assistance for low-income families. "I'm a little guilty, as it were," he said, of ultimately wanting free markets but promoting vouchers as an intermediary step.”
-- Friedman Promotes Vouchers at
“Government schools are islands of socialism in a sea of competition and choice.”
Heartland Institute [120]
Receives funding from Bradley, Olin, Koch, Scaife [121]
"The problem with
-- Peter Brimelow, The Worm in the Apple: How the Teacher Unions are Destroying America [122]
“You see, someone has to decide which books and reference materials are used in the schools. They are selected by the state. The history books, philosophy books, science books are all selected by the government! [. . .]”
Elizabeth Farah, Pulling kids out of government schools, part 1 [123]
“Work, research, relationships, loyalties, beliefs, maturity, dress, language, religious belief and leisure activities, health related choices, the very perceptions of reality, have all been perverted by the introduction of government controlled education.”
Elizabeth Farah, Pulling kids out of government schools], part 2 [124]
There are some who suggest that we should read the accusations of the Right as being more revealing of their own intent:
“If all schools were private, parents would control education. That's precisely why the liberals, and some so-called conservatives, would never give up government schools. They want to control the children.”
- R. Cort Kirkwood [125]
“Collectivist” Schools
The frequent use of terms like this demonstrate how the Libertarian movement has contributed ideologically to the school privatization movement.
“If the government-backed education bureaucracy decides to adopt an education pedagogy that I regard as inadequate and even harmful to my children, such as one that places "socialization" and "political correctness" above factual knowledge and independent, efficacious thinking -- a "Progressive" philosophy that says to hell with precision in spelling, grammar and math, or phonics in reading, or principles in science, or objective truth in history, or logic in thinking -- I'm forced to pay for it.”
- Collectivism's Sacred Cow: Public Education [126]
“In all likelihood, most teachers are not even aware that they have been duped, brainwashed, into training children for living and believing in collectivist (i.e. communist/socialist) worldviews. Only by understanding the processes used to achieve these goals, will you be able to recognize them, and hope to combat them. In the end you may see that even the strongest attempts fail, and you may opt, as we finally did, to remove your children from public education.”
- Numbing and Dumbing: Educating Locally Towards Collectivism [127]
“Socialist” Schools
It is typical to find privatization proponents declaring that “Socialist” schools are “Indoctrinating” students
“Public education has unquestionably been the greatest tool for tyrants throughout the history of man. From the time of
Public education progressed rapidly in the twentieth century, as John Dewey and other socialists refined the art of brainwashing and amoral training. But the perfection of the public school concept undoubtedly came under Adolf Hitler and the Nazi regime in
- Retaking
Gary Wolfram, Ph.D., writes of public education as “socialism”
“…we have allowed our education system to continue as a socialist system, when it has been obvious to us and the rest of the world that such a system is fundamentally flawed. The collapse of eastern European socialism was inevitable. It is only through consumer choice and a system where producers are rewarded for making efficient use of resources (and punished for making inefficient use of resources) that our standard of living will increase. The result of holding tight to the socialist model for production of education has been similar to the results the Soviets had with their production system — poor quality of product and shortages. The collapse of our educational system is just as inevitable as was the Soviet system.
Peter Brimelow has written of five classic symptoms of socialism: (1) politicized allocation of resources, (2) proliferating bureaucratic overhead, (3) chronic mismatching of supply and demand, (4) susceptibility to top-down panaceas, usually requiring more input, and (5) qualitative and quantitative collapse. The average reader will immediately be aware that this describes the state of K-12 education …
[. . .] The education system … is essentially a socialist model, which cannot solve the problem of the decentralization of information about what your child’s needs and wants are. Nor can it solve the problem of providing incentives to ensure the efficient use of resources. Good schools do not get more customers, nor do bad schools go out of business. Pouring more money into this system will not result in a better education, but rather in a more politicized educational environment. For the sake of the children … we must tear down the Berlin Wall of the education system and make use of the market process for education — as we do for food, shelter, and all the other goods and services that we have in such abundance.” [129]
Homosexual Lifestyle
Many on the Right say that public schools promote a “homosexual lifestyle.”
“For years now, concerned parents and teachers have been watching– helpless and aghast– as homosexual activists invaded our public schools to promote the homosexual lifestyle.”
- EducationNews.org [130]
“Much of Dobson's [Dr. James Dobson of Focus on the Family] broadcasts emphasized curriculums that encourage acceptance of homosexuality, but he added, ‘The shocking thing is that this threat to kids is much, much broader than the homosexual movement. It doesn't stop there. It is aimed at the very core of the Judeo-Christian system of values, the very core of scriptural values. I'm telling you that is not an overstatement.’ ”
- Christianity Today [131]
At the Christian Broadcasting Network, a “news report” tells readers that,
“Homosexual activists put together a long-term plan some 16 years ago to convert
[. . .] In
“On
- The Deception and Desensitization of
“…Robert H. Knight, director of the Culture and Family Institute, said parents are not being told the truth about what their young children learn in school today. ‘If most parents understood the depth of the homosexual agenda in the schools,’ he argued, ‘there would be a revolution.’ ”
- Critics Slam 'Gay Agenda' in Public Schools - Fox News [134]
The following passage is from “Homosexuality and the Schools” by Midge Decter [135] , a Distinguished Fellow of the Institute on Religion and Public Life, which receives major funding – over $7.76 million – from mostly the Bradley Foundation, as well as Scaife, Coors & Olin. [136]
[AIDs education is] “outright homosexual propaganda …” [. . .] “The real problem here lies not with the homosexual activists who were invited to help write these documents, and who have their own agenda to pursue, but with those who invited them. The mayor, the chancellor, the bureaucrats, the teachers' union, the community leaders: how have they brought themselves to the point of trying to impose a course of homosexual propaganda on the schools ] with which they have been entrusted or over which they have sought to exert influence?
The answer is that, once again, children have been treated by the institutions of government as not much more than fodder for the cannons of passing political and cultural pressures. They have been bussed to schools far from home; they have, many of them, been deprived of the decent use of English; they have been promoted from grade to grade without achievement. Nor does this exhaust the list. And now they have been lined up yet again for feeding to another cannon in the dangerous cultural wars of the day.”
From “Homosexual Agenda Escalates in Public Schools” by Linda P. Harvey, [137]
“Pink triangles in classrooms. Grade school studies of "gay" history. Transvestite speakers. School-wide events to celebrate homosexuality. Student activists spreading propaganda through school publications. Legislation mandating homosexual indoctrination.
This was the school year 2000-2001. What will our neighborhood schools be doing this fall to support the relentless agenda of homosexual activists?
[. . .] The high school students also presented skits dealing with sexual molestation, rape, anorexia and suicide. Other workshops during this diversity week advocated radical environmentalism, socialism and animal rights.
[. . .] It's not just the liberal northeast and the "left coast" of
[. . .] An ethic of sexual anarchy with homosexuality as its lead issue is being deliberately sold to our youth under the guise of "safety" and "tolerance." Meanwhile, young people's lives and emotional stability are endangered if they make a decision in these tender years to engage in homosexual activity -- or are seduced into such acts by a teacher, coach, or older peer.”
And finally from the Education Establishment And The Homosexual Agenda, by William R. Alford [138]
“With an eye for the future, the battleground for gay activists is in the schools and children are the targets, a new book, The Homosexual Agenda reveals. Developments in at least one state capitol seem to bear the authors out. [. . .] Authors Alan Sears and Craig Osten describe a phenomenon that does more than threaten religious freedom. The 'sexual orientation community' is actively working to impose its value system upon the rest of society. The chapter entitled "Stupid Parents, 'Enlightened Kids"' is of particular interest to those who are concerned about childhood indoctrination. [. . .] Gay orthodoxy is being imposed upon minor children in class as undisputable fact, rather then even the subject of controversy or debate.”
Attacks on Teacher Unions
The following are examples of attacks on teacher unions as a propaganda tactic:
“That strategy must be to weaken the teacher unions financially. Any success in achieving this objective will facilitate virtually all conservative objectives, educational and non-educational. Conservatives must not merely oppose the NEA and AFT over the expansion of union prerogatives or over such discrete educational issues as outcomes based education, sex education, or multiculturalism. Instead, their objective must be to starve the gorilla, so that it can no long intimidate its neighbors over all such issues. If ever there were a need for conservatives to get their educational priorities straight, the next two years will be that time. It would be difficult to think of a situation in which the partisan interests of Republicans coincides as much with their public policy objectives.”
- Dr. Myron Lieberman, “Teacher Unions: Is the End Near?” [139]
“Organizations like the National Education Association (NEA) have been focusing their efforts on causes that are unrelated to education and destructive to the traditional family. While many educators don't realize the NEA union supports anti-family agendas, some educators have spent years trying to divert their dues away from the political arm of a left-leaning union. The lengths to which some unions go to support their agenda may surprise you.”
- Focus On The Family’s CitizenLink website [140]
“In an interview in a recent issue of School Reform News, published by the Heartland Institute, Lieberman [Myron Lieberman, chairman of the Education Policy Institute and author of a new book called “The Teacher Unions”] identifies teacher unions as “the major obstacle to market-oriented education reforms such as school choice and contracting out. They are also opposed to lowering the terminal age of compulsory schooling, homeschooling, and other reforms that are urgently needed." This opposition should not surprise anyone, says Lieberman. After all, "teacher unions were established to promote teacher welfare, not educational achievement. It would be remarkable," he insists, "if an organization established to redistribute income to teachers turned out to be optimal for increasing productivity.
"Lieberman argues that the best way to combat these obstructionists [teachers unions] is "to weaken the teacher unions financially so that they can no longer intimidate school boards and legislators. The ways to achieve this are: to reduce union revenues; to eliminate tax-payer subsidies that the unions receive but which should never have been given in the first place; and to impose on the teacher unions the same reporting and disclosure requirements imposed on private sector unions under the National Labor Relations Act."
“Lieberman recommends restrictions on agency shop fees, "probably the most important source of union revenues after membership dues. These are fees paid to the union by non-members who do not want to join the union," he explains, "and the fees are often clearly excessive. Legislation is needed to remedy this situation. [. . .] Better yet, privatize the entire public school system -- and we'll soon see an educational renaissance in
- F.R. Duplantier [141]
“The Worm in the Apple exposes teacher unions as a parasite that feeds off the school system. In his new book, Peter Brimelow argues that no educational reforms, however worthy, can work unless something is done about a central problem in the system: the teacher unions.”
- Promotion for book review discussion at Cato Institute [142]
“Indeed, the NEA offers a textbook example of how Big Labor bosses work hand in glove with Democratic politicians. Intentionally and almost certainly illegally, the NEA bosses and other Big Labor leaders and their Democratic vassals keep the rank-and-file members ignorant of the political use of millions and millions of dollars forcibly extracted form their paychecks in the form of compulsory union dues.”
- The
From Foundation Action, newsletter of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Fund, Inc. November/December 1999 Issue [144] :
“
Power Grab, authored by former high school principal G. Gregory Moo, shows that the NEA’s strategy is to corrupt and subvert local control of education in order to build its power and promote its ultraliberal social agenda -- to the detriment of students’ mastery of academics.
Power Grab reveals how the NEA -- the largest labor union in the nation -- works tirelessly to control schools, teachers, and children. The book also shows that the NEA:
· is the most violence-affected of all public sector labor unions,
· uses its power and wealth to control and intimidate teachers who disagree with its ideology and tactics,
· works to control the ideological content of every child’s curriculum,
· blocks competition, vouchers, and free-market charter schools, and,
· lends its considerable financial support almost exclusively to Far Left candidates and ultraliberal political causes.
Most importantly, Power Grab explains that the growing control that NEA union bosses hold comes from their specially granted privileges to compel teachers to pay union dues and submit to forced union "representation."
Teachers are forced to follow a morally bankrupt, ultra-leftwing political organization that does not represent the values of most teachers.”
Greedy
Continuing the propagandistic attacks on unions as a tactic to promote school privatization, the following is an example of the use of the term “Greedy
“At the national level, Gore’s running mate Sen. Joseph Lieberman was forced to recant his kosher belief in vouchers and parental choice and to gulp down the filthy pork demanded by teacher unions in monopoly socialist public schools. By this genuflection, Gore showed that he would betray and enslave millions of black children in a life-wrecking bad education in wretched public schools in order to serve greedy, powerful union bosses. Such unions - monopolies within the governmental monopoly -- are the biggest contributors, in both money and manpower, to the Democratic Party.
But such unions are more than greedy. They are also, in many cases, ideological. The National Education Association, e.g., wants not only to employ as many dues-paying teachers as possible but also to use them to teach politically-correct values to
Implicit in this NEA agenda, it seems, is the systematic dumbing down of our kids. After all, if kids were literate, knew history, and could think logically, none would grow up to vote for Democrats.”
-
-
Even Comic Strips Contain Anti-Teacher Union Propaganda
©Reprinted with special permission of King Features Syndicate
Mallard Fillmore Comic Strip [146]
©Reprinted with special permission of King Features Syndicate
Mallard Fillmore Comic Strip [147]
Where does all of this lead? For one thing, it more clearly defines the terms of the culture war as perceived by the Right. In the Washington Post, Bill Lind, Director of the Center for Cultural Conservatism at the influential Free Congress Foundation, offers a vision of the future, as people react after “Schools had become daytime holding pens for illiterate young savages” [148] :
“…The good ladies of the League of militant Homemakers made sure women put duty to husbands and children first; those who refused so they could pursue a "career" were given a big embroidered "C" to wear over their left breast.
The schools came next. We tossed out the vast accretion of "professional" educators and found ordinary men and women who knew their subjects and were dedicated to passing on the culture to a new generation. The kids learned to read with Mr. McGuffy’s readers. They learned to figure on a chalkboard instead of a computer that did the work for them. They learned the difference between right and wrong and got their bottoms fanned until they did.
We deconstructed most of the universities. After all, they had started this “multiculturalism” hysteria that ended up with millions of people dead in the wars that followed. The ideologues gone, real scholars emerged from hiding and began offering Greek and Latin and the great books of Western civilization to anyone who wanted to learn.
Christians took back their churches from the agnostic clergy, and the pews filled up again. The church, not the government, became the problem-solver when people were hungry or sick or old and without family. …”
Finally, all of this casual use of extreme language has its effect: the extreme becomes even more extreme. One online writer actually advocates killing parents of students in public schools, by challenging them to duels. This is included to show that the intensity of the movement’s rhetoric inspires an extreme reaction. Although the writer is not a nationally known authority, this demonstrates the type thinking that can be encouraged by the above examples.
“The education system had been totally reformed over the years. While public education now lasted for only four years- the First and Second Grades and the Eleventh and Twelfth Grades. The main purpose of public schools was to provide children with a proper respect for the nation’s institutions and ideals as well as through lessons as to her history: especially the mistakes of the 20th and 21st centuries. Non-denominational Religious instruction, while not compulsory, was almost universally attended. In the years between the second and eleventh grades children were educated in a variety of for-profit institutions which provided them with the tools for any sort of specialization. However, while education was generally a for-profit business (some institutions, mostly religious, political, or military in character were charities) no student was denied an education based on their parent’s inability to pay. However, the names of any parent forced to rely upon the public treasury to school their children were published in newspapers and online.
Naturally, many of those known to be living off of the taxpayers were prone to be challenged in duels.”
- Adam Teiichi Yoshida [149]