Keeping our Eyes on the Prize
by Joseph C. PhillipsThis week I had the honor of participating in a panel discussion on Civil Rights in the Age of Obama sponsored by the Milken Institute. Appearing with me on the panel were Ben Jealous, current President of the NAACP, Wade Henderson, President of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights and Myrlie Evers-Williams, Civil Rights Icon and former President of the NAACP. The panel was moderated by Dr. Beverly Tatum, President of Spelman College. I was, as my father used to say, “Steppin’ in some pretty high cotton.”
I can think of no better proof of the victory of the traditional civil rights movement than that these distinguished individuals (and myself) were gathered together under the auspices of the Milken Institute to ponder what to do next. The battles of the civil rights movement so hard fought have been won. To those heroes, on whose shoulders my generation stands I say, “job well-done.” That is not to say that we need not be jealous of our civil rights. It is to say that it is time to shift our focus toward those things that will best guard our victories and secure those blessings for future generations.
Malcolm X described education as the passport to the future, a sentiment that found general agreement among the panelists. All of us seemed to agree that the current public school system was failing our children – not just black children, but all of our children – and that there was a role for civil rights organizations to play in improving public education. The panel was split, however, on exactly what that role should be. Henderson for example argued for dismantling the state run school system and massive injections of federal dollars and oversight, an approach that I see as gulping down more of the poison that is killing us, while others decried the lack of diversity.
Unfortunately, in spite of all the flying rhetoric there was reluctance to amend the notion of government run schools and embrace the idea of publicly funded education.
For 40 years we have poured money into government run schools and yet math and reading scores have remained flat. Class size has been reduced and yet achievement gaps persist. If education funded from the top down is not delivering the results we want, perhaps we need to consider funding education from the bottom up – that is empowering the consumers of public education by allowing the public dollars to follow the students. Those of us concerned with civil rights in the age of Obama should be in the forefront of the fight for school choice, fighting for charter schools and vouchers, fighting against the legal challenges to homeschooling and demanding greater autonomy for principals in choosing staff and curriculum. There is nothing partisan about fighting for the health of public education and against the sovereignty of government schools.
My suspicion is that once parents have choice- schools will be integrated. More importantly the schools will be effectively educating our young people, preparing them to be contributing members of our society.
Civil rights in the 21st century must finally and unashamedly admit that there is a moral component to the enterprise. There was much back and forth among the panelists about the disparate impact of this or that policy, but we as a community are being dishonest if we do not recognize that very often disparate outcomes are the result of disparate behavior, difference of choices and differences in the values one holds and the traditions and institutions one chooses to recognize and support.
We can convene a hundred conferences on education or jobs, but so long as marriage rates are down and illegitimacy is up, so long as we continue to entertain attacks on religious principles in public life, so long as objective notions of right and wrong are looked upon as the province of bigoted unsophisticates we will find ourselves powerless and continually engaged in gum flapping.
Civil rights has always meant the requirement that this nation live up to the “true meaning of her creed” and secure the inalienable rights to life, liberty and private property for all citizens regardless of race. The victories of the modern civil rights movement were achieved because they were built upon this moral terra firma. Until and unless we regain that footing, civil rights organizations will continue to fight for relevance and we will find further victories few and far between.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Tips & Feedback
60 Comments
One always has to check who is got an ox to gore.
I don't think the pols and the unions are willing to change anythig fundamentally. They have a monopoly and they are not going to give it up just to improve education. I hope I am wrong.
you are not wrong brucelee – it is only about power.
Amen. AS a product of public education I agree with your points. I grew up in a mostly African American neighbor and whilst our neighbors were lying about addresses so their kids weren't the minority, my mom bravely did the opposite. Of course she didn't expect public education to raise me either.
But as far as being against school vouchers and subsequently choice of aschools, don't they realize that by kids able to go to other schools, then public funds can be more evenly distributed. And if not then I think brucelee is right. It's about power not educating our young.
It's amazing that some see school choice as a means to rob the public schools of their money rather than allow today's youth to get a better education. School choice has been shown to work and more people deserve a chance to get the education they need. Our local public school district is asking for a double digit increase in funding, but they continue to waste money in ways no one could have imagined. Choice is all well and good for a pregnant woman, but heaven forbid we apply it to our young children.
Amen that, Mr. Steve. They're pro-choice as long as it means they can choose to kill something that they irresponsibly created but no longer want (and their counter argument for that is that every aborted baby was conceived via rape).
They're not, however, pro-choice on such things as what kind of car you drive, what school you go to, what radio shows you listen to, and this just in, what kind of frigging grocery bags you use.
I'm gonna go turn my car on and let it idle for a few hours. Because I can.
The election of Obama has made me even more proud of America. Unfortunately, the struggle of African Americans for equality in this country has been so right and so successful that it's spawned a host of imitators, whose causes are not quite so righteous and whose actual aim is more power for the left, rather than more equality and liberty for the people they "represent"
Joseph,
I congratulate you. Excellent commentary. I think it goes to the heart of the matter. We Americans as a people are not truly free until ALL races are treated equally and profound change takes place to insure that fact in our collective thinking. Having the freedom to choose the school for our children is rooted in the great American tradition of the competitive spirit. The excellent educators will rise to the top and stimulate innovation and a desire to improve in those who are at or below average in the educational skills. This is what is most important to our children's educational opportunity no matter race, religion or creed.
There is nothing more important than the education of our youth. The civil rights movement moving towards quality education for all americans could be the greatest accomplishment any movement has done for this country. We need to move to freedom of choice. I hope that unions will allow it. The struggles are great and the cause is noble.
I've never understood how it's OK for Tech Schools, Colleges, and Universities, even State run institutions, to compete for student enrollment, but grade schools and high schools can't.
Agree with everything posted re education, but nothing is going to change there. The Lefties need brainwashing to keep the blacks on the Liberal Plantation. What most African-Americans don't see, however, is that they're about to be screwed again by Obama's "national health". While on paper, a NHS looks GREAT and it is great when it comes to getting Physical Exams and vaccinations, however, when one gets REALLY SICK, then the youknowwhat hits the fan. Blacks have certain proclivities to medical problems that are expensive to treat and life threatening — kidney disease comes immediately to mind. Dialysis and transplantation costs big bucks. We've been able to fund these with our private system, however, before African Americans sign on to the Messiah's Health system, check out the transplants available in the UK and other National Health systems.
I'm with ya, Joe! I think it's time to stop looking at race and start looking at solutions. ALL of our children need the best education they can get! Address schools by their needs, not by their makeup. Whatever system works the best, public schools, vouchers, charter schools, do it. And take politics out of the classroom! No wonder our kids are failing, some of the mush their young skulls are getting filled with. The three r's will do for kids. The rest can come later.
Obama is a slave to the power interests of the the democratic party (just like Bush was with the republicans).
The teachers unions (UAW and Service unions also) will not allow school choice. Because it is not about the future of the USA ( our future depends on good inner city education) it is about power and the unions can now rule because Obama is allowing Reid and Pelosi to run wild. The fact Obama said and did nothing about the ending of the Washington DC federal voucher program was chilling and foretelling.
Good read, and good luck. The teachers with the aid of the NEA are nothing more than a jobs program for the government indoctrination centers. They could care less about results it’s all about the money, the jobs, and a powerful voting constituency for the left. Schools need competition to excel and any teacher worth his or her salt would accept the challenge for the good of all the children that are enslaved in failing schools. When Barry denied the incredibly successful voucher program in DC the funds needed to continue speaks volumes about Washington Politicians in general. Keep on fighting for what is right.
Private schools are for rich Democrats (only). They are happy to throw poor blacks under the bus, however. At least Republicans support choice. Or a girl’s right to abort a politically incorrect education.
Those on the left are not interested in civil rights despite their claims to the contrary; if they were genuinely concerned they would have voiced opposition to the blatantly fascistic and unconstitutional tactics displayed by obama and his goons.
As Mike said in the second comment it’s all about power. Public schools receive taxpayer dollars per student. The more seats that are filled the more money for the school administrators and the union dregs. It is in their best interest, obviously not the child’s, to ensure that those students remain in a failing school otherwise union dregs will ultimately lose their jobs and that is why there’s opposition to school choice/vouchers.
To have an honest discussion about the ills of public education, one must start with the state of the family. Most inner city families are in utter disarray. There are 70-80% illigetimacy rates. These children are not prepared to do well in school because they are not prepared at home. No amount of money is going to change this. The reason I did well in school and cared about my grades was because if I messed up my father would kick my butt. When there is no father, there is no fear and, therefore, no incentive. That is the root of the problem.
It's not merely the monopoly that they fear losing. Put kids in a school where they actually get an education, and the game is over. No truly educated person of good will, with a genuine knowledge of American history (including the bad things we did), and a love of freedom would ever settle for special privilege which is really just perpetual segregation and patronization from their "betters." I fought in the first phase of the Civil Rights Movement. It's up to another generation to fight for the right to be treated like everyone else, not as some poor helpless victim of ginned-up racism.
The day I hear all our so-called leaders of every party, race, creed, color and national origin saying in unison that the family must be the most basic unit of American civilization, that crime isn't acceptable for anybody, and that the much-misused "diversity" should be respected, while unity must be celebrated, I will know we have nearly reached the goal we fought for forty-five years ago.
I would like to comment on the idea that flushing billions more down the NEA toilet will somehow benefit the children.
My parents were educated [both engineers by trade] in the former USSR and although the communists were iron fisted monsters they understood that their future relied on an educated public. In the USSR educational system you didn’t have underwater basket weaving, women studies, chicano studies or victimology. You were immersed in mathematics, world history, science, Russian literature, etc. Russia spent a fraction per student compared to the US with far greater results [$300 compared to $10,000 per student]; Russians were on average 4 years ahead of their American counterparts.
In Russia there wasn’t a fear of educating the masses, which would inevitably lead to the rejection of communism, because the communists understood they had the populace at the barrel of a gun. The democrats however can’t control us at the barrel of a gun so how do they create complicity? By dumbing down the population and stripping all critical thinking abilities from their students while demonizing all things non-leftist. An educated populace is not in the best interest of the NEA or democrats.
My kneejerk reaction to the notion of school choice and vouchers is hell yeah! (And believe me; I am in love with the idea of bettering our education system.) But considering it, I’m not sure how this would we beneficial for the school, the new voucher kids, and the currently enrolled students. Somebody please walk me through this?
Are private schools improved when forced to take students that government says they must now take? Private schools go through an application and acceptance process. And how would taxpayer-funded vouchers not end up like another welfare trap in which recipients are unappreciative (because it’s ‘free’, i.e., the parents don’t pay for it) and lower the overall quality of institution?
What about the notion of scrapping the current government-run education system and making all schools private? The competition would drive down tuition fees for all schools, increase competition for quality teachers, and thus quality education could be afforded by most anyone, even without taxpayers’ involvement.
I mean no disrespect, and feel free to cut me a new one… I’m simply curious.
Excellent video up on Reason:
http://reason.com/blog/show/133298.html
Bravo! from a homeschooling father of four.
I've never been quite clear about how vouchers work. I've only seen them offered in what seems like very small amounts ($2000-$5000) and every private school I know of costs many times more than that. Even parochial schools have high fees. Who pays the difference? And privatizing the school system? Wow. Making all schools private is a far cry from making them all good, IMO. I think if every family was forced to pay tuition there would truly be riots in the streets. It would just create more frenzy for private school admissions, and so they'd raise their tuition so they could be even more selective. Everyone else would be stuck paying for their same old public school, and extremely bitter about it.
If the roles were reversed, and it was right wig institutions insisting on maintaining a failing public school system and attacking vouchers & charters, the charges of racism would be flying fast and furiously. With mostly white school boards and teachers unions holding back poor minority children, it is clear that minority legislators care more about their liberal masters than their own children.
Another excellent essay, Joseph! Thank you for your clear thoughts.
With the attack on vouchers in Washington D.C., it would appear that Obama's daughters are the only minority children allowed to have access to a first rate education.
I have begun to wonder if African-American families were better off before civil rights. It seems to me there has been an almost complete breakdown of the family. Were they were sold a bill of goods by leaders of the movement. I do not understand how, with all the programs in place, as a group there is so much despair. Was there something to gain by tearing these families apart specifically?
I would really like to know what happened.
What a wonderful post.
Ironically, its feeling unobtainable.
Supplement your kids with homeschooling. I do, and it works miracles.
We will never be able to wrest the government school away from the folks trying to protect their rice bowl; all we can do is make them irrelevant, at least for the next thirty years.
There will always be a public sector school. But, with the introduction of CHOICE and COMPETITION, when your kid is not being met with a tremendous educational opportunity, you walk them out. And your student's per-cap allocation goes with them. You don't necessarily get to force the kid into a school, either, they are limited by space.
I have a great kid; even though he's a big theater and drama player. (Scrooge lead at Christmas, and Egeus in "A Midsummer Night's Dream", he KNOWS he's going to NMSU to work with "energetic materials"; (read that as, 'learning to blow stuff up'). No "Starry Eyes" here.
The teachers support him, because he moves the bell curve right enough on the average to help their goals in education mandates from the state. NMSU wants a student that won't spend the first two years in remedials. They already have his life planned out for him there.
We are not rich, in fact, we hold on with our fingertips. But we supplemented the government school curricula with home schooling, which anyone can do, IF THEY WANT TO. And you will see new schools that will seek out the lower performers to change their direction. Once the stranglehold gets broken, the students and their funding will be the driving force for the changes. The working schools will continue to attract students and funding, those that don't make it, well…
I was lucky. I was able to raise my kids in one of the few school districts where political correctness and teachers union politics hadn't yet ruined the schools. Even at that, they still had to stick with the state curriculum which went through new math and creative spelling during their time in the public schools. That meant their mother and me spending a lot of time with them at home undoing the damage. Children are not lab animals to be experimented with, yet that is exactly how these so-called educators treat them. Far too many of today's teachers wouldn't have qualified to be the janitors at the public schools my wife, my kids, and I attended. My heart goes out to those who have to raise their kids in the current environment.
Great column, Joe, especially the poison gulping line.
Solutions? From what I've seen, charter schools, charter schools and, lemme see, charter schools seem to offer the best ones. http://popmodal.com/video/2238/MrEPluribus–Flunk...
What about tuition tax credits? Vouchers are public money and when you have public money involved…..
Does anyone think you can't educate a kid at a private school for a fraction of what the local public schools spend all whilst allowing your kid to attend a school with biases you support?
"I was able to raise my kids in one of the few school districts where political correctness and teachers union politics hadn't yet ruined the schools."
Was that the school next door to the unicorn factory?
Right now the state sends a fixed amount per year to the school that your child is forced to attend. That amount is taken from state taxes. If I were to decide to send my kid to private school, I end up paying for both my kid to go to school (through private tuition) and for somebody else's kid (through state taxes).
Now, if I had a voucher for that fixed, per-student amount that I could apply to a private tuition, I would only be paying to educate my kid.
This won't directly improve anything but my child's education. That is a choice I should be able to make.
Far too many of today's teachers wouldn't have qualified to be the janitors at the public schools my wife, my kids, and I attended
That's the part that's truly disappointing in today's teaching 'standards'. My mother in law was just let go from her teaching job, because they merged 2 school districts down in Florida… and because (even though she won't admit it) the union forced the school to take the teachers from the "development" school, even though the test scores/standards at that school district were much worse than her school had.
Joseph, as much as I loved the column… and it hit a lot on the money.. please tell me that the name of the meeting was not "Civil Rights in the Age of Obama"?
But back to the point at hand… why is it that at one point, our Kindergarden's were ranked 1st in the world in terms of student ability. 4th graders dropped to somewhere around 10th… 8th graders even further.. and by high school…. We aren't even in the top 40 around the world?
Gary, your argument is that private schools are forced to take students… that's not the case, from what i've always understood, and I may be mistaken:
A voucher simply says you may apply to schools of your choice… not that they must accept you. It's somewhat like the college admission process, and there are gambles. (oi, the memories of stacks of stacks of brochures!)
There is the catch that your child will be rejected by all the schools, there is the catch that the schools/govt will try to mandate some sort of quota systems. (aka; University of Michigan's AA plan), but the current system is not working… our kids are not getting a quality education now. Forcing the supply to meet our 'quality levels' is the step in the right direction.
Most of the school choice voucher systems allow students to select their choice of school, but some schools require that the students meet the minimum standards to attend (i.e. entrance exam). This gives students starting first grade an advantage when they are young to attend a better school. As they reach high school, their education over the previous 8+ years may determine if they can attend the school of their choice. There are other schools that would accept them, but they may not get to go to their first choice. Everyone may want to go to MIT or Stanford, but there has to be a limit on how many people can attend. As for the state dollars paying for the private school, it does happen, even if the dollars don't actually cover the cost needed to attend.
To debbie1960:
Take it from this 60 year old black American, southern born and bred female who has lived through segregation and what we are experiencing now, don't believe everything you read on the web.newspapers/magazines, etc. or see or hear on the television, radio or web. Haven't you heard there are lies, damn lies and statistics? There is such a thing as an agenda.
One of the reasons I am home; not just to try to develop a writing career, but to insure that my kids develop the wisdom, intelligence, and ability to overcome statist lib stupidity in the future.
I hope.
I hold out little hope for our educational system. The power of the Teacher's Union needs to be knocked down a couple of notches and we must start making education a collaboration between schools and parents/guardians. I'm referring to a mandated collaboration. When student's fall below a certain level, their parents must attend classes also, classes that teach parents what needs to be done in the home. The schools and teachers can not do it alone.
Unfortunately, I think we have to hit rock bottom before any meaningful changes will occur.
Here's an example of how screwy our educational system is (of course, there are tens of thousands of examples).
A school in Illinois, with a high Hispanic, ESL population, was recognized by the State Board of Ed. for raising tests scores. Afterwards, it was found out that the schools were not teaching ESL students in the required by state law way. It wasn't that the schools were intentionally not teaching according to state law, but after continuous failing results, they tweaked the way they taught (imagine, putting your heads together to come up with something new when the current way isn't working) and it worked.
Well, after first recognizing the schools for their achievement and then finding out they weren't teaching according to the way that didn't work, the state suspended their ESL funding.
As one Board of Education official said (have to love bureaucracy), "When we monitor the bilingual program, we're looking at the services they are suppose to legally provided. We are not looking at how they are doing."
The school district then lobbied lawmakers to allow for more flexibility in their requirements for funding ESL teaching.
Common-sense has been thrown out the window. School districts are handcuffed by so much crap coming from lawmakers, lobbyists, unions, etc., that the education of children is at the bottom.
Once again, an excellent column. I'm quite well versed with the differences between public and private schools, having attended the former, I insisted my daughter attend the later. And though she's having a rough time with Spanish and Geometry, I'm confident her education is superior to her public school friends. Just the other day I helped her study for a Global quiz on the Cold War era, and I was amazed just how much of it she had already learned. Just needed to smooth down a few misconceptions.
The real problem, as I see it, while its important to meet, discuss, exchange ideas, and all, while this process goes on, every day, another generation of children are exchanging Global Studies for Diversity Awareness, Science for man made global warming, and ethics for bashing American history.
This is an issue that is too important to pass off to never ending rounds of expert testimony, political meanderings, and solidifying union control over our kids.
I agree, vouchers are the way to go, and it should be a top priority. While it will not solve all problems, it at least gives some parents a chance to do better for the kids. That is where the decisions need to be made, not in state capitols, not in union halls, not in teacher's colleges, and least of all not in DC.
I know–it does seem like a fantasy, doesn't it? We raised our kids in Simi Valley, a strong conservative area which did most of its school funding from local "booster clubs" in defiance of the rule of the Educommies in Sacramento. My youngest graduated from high school in '93, but by then I had already relocated to San Francisco. My older daughter moved back into Simi Valley with her two boys, and she says that it's still better than what she saw in the San Fernando Valley, but not what it used to be. Local funding can only go just so far, and property taxes allocated for schools still have to be sent to Sacramento for "redistribution" That means for every tax dollar a Simi Valley home owner sends, Sacramento redistributes per capita fifteen cents to South Central L.A., eleven cents to Oakland, and a penny-and-a-half back to the ones actually paying the taxes. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need." Sound familiar? Yet somehow, with all that expenditure of absconded funds, South Central and Oakland have ended up as armed shooting galleries with nearly zero academic achievement, while the Simi Valley School District still ranks consistently in the top five school districts in the state. Isn't socialism wonderful?
Local school control has always been a white plot to keep people of color uneducated. They didn't tell you? Since the white folks had better schools, God (with the help of the Supreme Court) invented "busing." First from one part of a city to another, then from one part of a county to another, then across county lines, and halfway across a state. That worked very well, but it meant that persons of color were forced into schools where white kids might ruin the ethnic identities of the persons of color. So, God (with the help of the state boards of eduction and The Supreme Court) invented re-segregation, bilingualism, and ethnic pride programs. Now all the kids are back at home, happy as clams, and dumber than dirt.
Both my daughters work (in California, it's damned near a necessity). But I guess their mom and I put enough effort into their education that they saw the wisdom in it. The older one is an activist in promoting old-fashioned core programs, and the younger one will be quitting her job at the end of the year to start home-schooling her kids in a rural part of Kern County where they live on what comes close to being a family farm. So far, all eight grandkids are smart, academically successful students, despite their teachers' best effort to keep them in educational chains.
I haven't read all the comments but has anyone ever considered why NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND really failed. It's really quite simple; (even though liberals cry about under funding) when the very people charged with making the program work hate your guts (President Bush) they do everything in they power to make it fail. Where was the incentive for the NEA to allow Mr. Bush's policies to succeed? Like wise why would they allow anyone to take away their total domination of the hundreds of billions of dollars spent annually on education? It will require more than a few conferences and panel discussions to dislodge this powerful union.
If this 'USSR' did as well as you say, where exactly are they today? Scrambling to get their collars back on? Hey, maybe they ARE 4 years ahead of us!
You used the key word: Opportunity. Too many people want equal outcomes or to ignore students with talent, when it's always been about opportunity to start with. If you think the voucher debate is bad, look at the anti-tracking/pro-gifted arguments going on in education. I always thought educating kids according to their talent and interest was about helping the country get ahead, but apparently not.
You chose to live in both the San Fernando Valley and San Francisco? You are a tougher man than I am.
Can I suggest the lovely city of Irvine for your next relocation? Sure, its still in Taxifornia, but it's very nice. In fact, today it was once again named the biggest safe city in California.
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/violent-crime-...
And as a veteran of the civil rights movement, I just want to add that it wasn't the movement that created the problem. We were right, segregation and the inferior/superior mindset had to go. The problem was the Great Society and all the "whites know what's best for you" welfare programs that started the death spiral of the black family (and not a few white families as well). It was nothing more than racial segregation by new and more insidious means.
After my divorce, I moved into North Hollywood since I had a client who was a realtor there who owed me a favor. More convenience than choice. By the time my older daughter got married (she met her future husband at CSUN), ordinary people starting out couldn't afford to live in Simi Valley anymore. So they got an apartment in Northridge. They were up here visiting me when the big quake hit. Their apartment was at ground zero. I was relieved that they were safe here. Knocked on the bedroom door to give them the news, only to have her tell me that my younger daughter was apartment-sitting for them while they were here visiting. Great fun ensued!
If I moved to Irvine, wouldn't I have to go to your UC football games and yell "Zlot!?" It doesn't have the same ring as "Go Bears!" But I could adapt.
UCI does not have a football team. In fact, neither does Anaheim or Los Angeles.
We do, however, have the Angels and Ducks.
Well said. Then the gun comes later?
I completely forgot about the football team (or lack thereof). My bad. The Anteaters are the baseball and basketball teams. I'm so old that the Angels were a minor league baseball team in Los Angeles. I even had a beaded belt with Los Angeles Angels worked through the beading. That was before Gene Autry took the Angels into the bigs. Mydad had a friend who played in the minors.
I'm somewhat familiar with Irvine–pre-university. It was beautiful country, and I hear it's still very nice. We had a summer home in Laguna Beach, so I'm familiar with the old Orange County. I know it has changed considerably, not all for the good.
One book I read called War Against Excellence talked about how the "Middle School Movement" caused this decline. Don't know if that's correct, but check out the book/website of that name for yourself.
Will there ever be an African-American whose life and thoughts aren't consumed by race? They talk about in endlessly, write nothing that isn't focussed on it, obsess about their racial past, and even major in it in college. If whites devoted just 10 percent of the time and energy to race as do blacks, the whole friggin world would go nuts. Race obsession is racism pure and simple. It was wrong for the Klan, it was wrong for the Nazis, it's wrong for blacks.
Thank you. As a pruduct of the 70's all I heard in school was how this was all going to work out for the greated good for everyone.
So, where do wy go from here?
Your recent comment seems to have disappeared, but I did pick it up.
I wish I had an answer. We're working nearly blind here. But I do know that no matter how true the underlying logic may be, we have to find a better way of getting out the message about affirmative action and welfare. By being so virulent about it, we have come off as attacking the people who are being harmed by it on both sides. I know I'd be ticked off if some hoity-toity white guy came into my community and told me that I was only surviving because of affirmative action and welfare. I can do that with poverty-pimp white people, but it would be rude and counter-productive for me to talk that way to a black family that is truly looking for a way out.
The left constantly talks about "empowering people," when they really mean "enslaving them by other means." We need to find a way to get out the message that "empowerment" begins with the family, the schools and the churches, not with government programs. I can be sure of one thing–there are millions of black success stories out there, and they need to be told. Having someone like me talk about pulling yourself up by your bootstraps is just not believable to a black kid in second or third generation poverty and desperation. I'm willing to bet tnwoman is one of those people who could do exactly that. And it doesn't have to be about "how I made my first million," either. Just a simple story of "how I worked my way out of poverty with the help of my family and good friends, and now have a happy home and a good life without waiting for the social worker to tell me what to do next" would be extremely effective. Taking help from a government program is not a sin, but building your life around it is crippling.
OK, since we are on Big Hollywood, is this kind of idea that could be turned into a documentary. Something that could be shown at schools, regardless of the grade? then after the movie was previewed, particpants could be there to answer questions and the children could even go home with a signed copy of a book. Something they could always carry with them. If they couldn't read, maybe this would be the motivation to begin.
Just an idea.
"Making all schools private is a far cry from making them all good…"
Private enterprises get good through competition with other private enterprises. They get good or people vote with their feet…and they go out of business. Without competition, i.e., the free market, there is no incentive to improve or even keep existing standards high. You get what you get. And 'forced to pay tuition'…they're paying tuition now, in the form of taxes that go to public education. Competition would lower the tuition, making many schools more affordable (see my comment above). It's not one size fits all. Do you shop for food at a grocery store? If the government ran 'food distribution' and food was now 'free'…you'd see people hungry, grumbling, unhappy with the quality. Hmmm…just like they are now over public education.
Funny how government running what should be in the private market tends to do that.
The mere fact that basic Capitalism and free market principles has to be explained like this is further proof of the abject FAILURE of our public education system.
Actually, I went to private school, but it was a long time ago, I will admit. (I remember when we got Commodore 64 computers! WOW!!) I also don't have kids, so this isn't particularly a hot button issue for me, although I'd love paying less taxes since all schools would be funded soley with private money. But I imagine a family's tax bill for public education is a lot less than tuition for each individual child would be. Who would make up the difference? How many new private schools would be required to accommodate every child in America? I never took economics, but if you charge less for a product in order to stay competitive–in this case the product is education–don't you have to lower overhead as well? Wouldn't that be teacher salaries? How low can tuition get and still retain (American) teachers worth a damn as well as provide top-notch services? Or would it be like the nursing industry, which attracts large numbers of foreigners because there aren't enough Americans to fill all the positions needed. I don't think it would necessarily benefit poor areas either. To use your food analogy, poor neighborhoods sport tons of fast food chains, not fine dining restaurants because no one can afford it. I think that would translate to private schools in those areas as well. I'm not trying to be argumentative, it just seems impractical. But Hell, let's grab some stimulus funds and do a study!!
You must be logged in to post a comment.