Yeah ... I'm with you on this one, Greg. In fact, the deeper I got into the article, the more and more angry I became.
"A primary purpose of the educational system is to train school children in good citizenship, patriotism and loyalty to the state and the nation as a means of protecting the public welfare."
Why does this statement feel an awful lot like something that could come out of a communist textbook? Consider ...
In the first enthusiasms of the revolution, the children of the professional, propertied and aristocratic classes were often debarred from the schools, for communist theory frankly recognized that the schools should be class institutions training the proletariat for communism and communistic leadership. ["Education Under Communism Contrasted with that Under Capitalism, " Journal of Educational Sociology, Vol. 9, No. 3 (Nov. 1935), pp 154-66.]
Could somebody please explain to me how this is significantly different than: "A primary purpose of the educational system is to train school children in good citizenship, patriotism and loyalty to the state"? Because in my mind, the primary purpose of an education is to teach certain, fundamental skill sets, which, when applied properly, ought to provide the educated individual with the proper tools needed to appropriately analyze and work within any number of possibilities that may be encountered in life. Therefore, a properly educated individual ought to be able, on his/her own strength, determine that a democratic system is the best possible solution in a fallen world.
But no. Apparently, I need the state to train my kid in how he should properly love the state. Can he add? Can he read? Who cares. Is he a patriot? What a joke!
"A primary purpose of the educational system is to train school children in good citizenship, patriotism and loyalty to the state and the nation as a means of protecting the public welfare."
Why does this statement feel an awful lot like something that could come out of a communist textbook? Consider ...
In the first enthusiasms of the revolution, the children of the professional, propertied and aristocratic classes were often debarred from the schools, for communist theory frankly recognized that the schools should be class institutions training the proletariat for communism and communistic leadership. ["Education Under Communism Contrasted with that Under Capitalism, " Journal of Educational Sociology, Vol. 9, No. 3 (Nov. 1935), pp 154-66.]
Could somebody please explain to me how this is significantly different than: "A primary purpose of the educational system is to train school children in good citizenship, patriotism and loyalty to the state"? Because in my mind, the primary purpose of an education is to teach certain, fundamental skill sets, which, when applied properly, ought to provide the educated individual with the proper tools needed to appropriately analyze and work within any number of possibilities that may be encountered in life. Therefore, a properly educated individual ought to be able, on his/her own strength, determine that a democratic system is the best possible solution in a fallen world.
But no. Apparently, I need the state to train my kid in how he should properly love the state. Can he add? Can he read? Who cares. Is he a patriot? What a joke!
posted by Just a Few Things about Scott ... | 2:11 PM
3 Comments:
In all seriousness... Your post should be sent to Aah-nold. It's an excellent point, made quite excellently.
The same thought had come across my mind...i.e., what's the purpose of an education again?
...but again--it's what I have come to expect from a liberally run educational system. In short, the goal of the liberal education system is NOT education, but rather indoctrination.
Americans are bad. Christopher Columbus was evil. The native americans (i.e., indians) did no wrong. Global warming is real. Conservatism is bad, because they're mean to people. I can go on...
I hope the case is appealed and overturned. That's about all I have to say about that...
For what it's worth, about 2 years ago, in the middle of my crap year at Bancroft, I realized I needed to improve my vocabulary with regard to education philosophies, because I was feeling some significant differences with my co-workers and administrators, but couldn't put words to them too well.
In my research, I was able to determine that I am (I think) a Perennialist. Sounds like you guys might be as well.
I read the blog of a woman who homeschools in California - she had an interesting counterpoint to the panic that she posted today, for those who are interested in another perspective - I thought it worth a read - it's here
Post a Comment
<< Home