Monday, July 28, 2008

The Poverty of Liberalism: Education Edition.

Liberalism ultimately impoverishes the societies it infects because liberals must offer progressively more expensive government as the solution to every problem. With each passing generation, liberals promise more than can be reasonably afforded, and voters vote for it because it becomes the easy way out of whatever problem liberals have hyperbolized into crisis.

The destruction of American education is the latest victim of liberalism. In 1965 LBJ promised Americans the best schools in the world would accompany much greater federal involvement in K-12. Forty years later, schools are going broke all over the United States. Today’s
DM Register exposes at least sixty Iowa school districts are, effectively, insolvent.

This insolvency does not arise from overpaying most teachers, to be sure. Rather than maintain the traditional role of educating children to function at their respective capabilities’ as good citizens the modern American school has adopted cultural transformation and the euphemistic empowerment of the individual personality as the primary objectives, closely followed by bureaucratic empowerment and job preservation as secondary objectives. As the American public has gradually become more poorly educated it has demanded ever more of the same from our schools because, of course, it is much easier to have the school parent than actually parent oneself.

For years the cost of education, primary, secondary and post-secondary have grown much faster than the overall rate of inflation. While every politician rushes to pledge limitless support for education, no politician in either party has publicly inquired as to the source of this seemingly unnecessary anomaly.

The one who does might find a public ready to follow.


Anonymous said...

Quit wasting money on extra-curriculars. That would help a little bit. And elect board members who know something about fiscal responsibility.

RF said...


You constantly whine about the liberal influence in the education system and have often mentioned how liberals dominate all the school boards. If true, why is that? Why are conservatives and R’s not getting involved? Nothing prevents conservatives running for school boards. Or are we, once again, hearing only lipservice about family values and caring about kids. When push comes to shove, why are conservatives not stepping up to the plate?

Anonymous said...

Because conservatives hate kids and would like to serve them only ketchup for school lunches. ;-)

Anonymous said...

the school boards have almost now power anymore. the nea controls the schools, not the school boards.

look how hard jonathon narcisse works to keep them honest. He's villified for demanding the truth.

Keep on truckin Jon.

The others are in it for a tea party and to get invited to all the really cool cocktail parties.

Anonymous said...

rf - what do you think about the 40+ years monopoly on public schools? Do you think the NEA has done a good job? Are you satisfied with the state of public education in america?

R's have had nothing to do with it. They passed no child left behind to FORCE improvement. It was the best thing that happened to education - although just a crack.

Yes, we want them to teach to the test. The test covers what we want them to know. Teach to the test. Teach to the test!

Teachers don't want to teach. They want to be union widget workers.

Anonymous said...

Didn't take long to trot out the old "blame the NEA" chant did it? How many times has the NEA been on your local curriculum committee? The NEA doesn't make local school district policy - your board members do.
And if most teachers didn't want to teach - they sure as hell wouldn't show up for the crappy pay year after year. A McDonald's manager probably makes more than someone who has taught 10 years.

Anonymous said...

The NEA begats the ISEA which begats the DMEA and every other UNION of teachers.

The students lose every time the UNION comes to the table to reduce teaching time for free time.

The students lose every time the UNION makes outlandish benefit requests at the expense of schoolbooks, brick and morter.

The students lose everytime the UNION says it knows best about how to teach children. Clearly they don't because they aren't.

Just how long can the teachers union blame parents for their children not learning and even when parents are involved, blame their lack of success solely on their salary?

If the UNIONS had gotten their way last session, the school boards would have NOTHING to say about curriculum, or ANYTHING!

Look how hard the UNION trys to destroy the only thing working - No Child Left Behind. It makes them teach. They don't want to teach.

How would YOU explain the problem?

Anonymous said...

Unions can strike - teachers can't strike in Iowa.
And if it's such an overpaid job why the hell aren't there thousands of people going into education to make such easy money for such little work?

Anonymous said...

What on earth reason is there for a UNION to represent teachers if they can't even strike. Gee, that's no fun.