Public education is the primary platform progressives are using to push their political agenda. And republicans are helping pay for it. That republicans have implicitly agreed to fund this ridiculous liability is contemptible and indicative of a broader political problem. Republicans have thought of no viable alternative to Dewey’s K-12 socialist regime.
To address this issue conservatives must answer the following question : what kind of world should we expect schools to help create?
One simple answer is this: one that works. One where citizens, with justifiable joy and casual confidence, vigorously strive to increase world wealth and personal health. Only work can move humanity toward this life-affirming goal. Working generates the world awareness, the fortified resolve, and the persistent diligence necessary for a prosperous economy and life longevity.
But today’s data says college education isn’t working. Nor are professors, teachers, or administrators making colleges work for students. Instead universities are rapidly being converted into 4-year luxury resorts for marginally interested students. Additionally, college courses are gradually becoming easier as professors make concessions to more and more unprepared students. As of 2013, more and more A’s were being given away than in any other point in US history.
Here then is the cultural problem with colleges: the over-emphasis on education is actually producing citizens who can’t think and demand entitlements. For republicans this should be enough to move away from the current “educational” regime. Instead, Republicans should be urging lawmakers toward a greater emphasis on training.
Training differs from education for the following reasons. Training is the rigorous and vigorous drilling of crucial skills like reading, writing, and arithmetic and later, in the teenage years, the trades. Education on the other hand consists of aiding young citizens in justifying, formulating, and articulating their own world outlook. Now, between the two, there is a high degree of overlap. But a greater emphasis on training would steer young citizens away from the abstractness involved in the humanities and toward the concrete practices of the trades.
The core of this decision can be justified on the following grounds. First, as alluded above, students aren’t being taught to formulate, articulate, and justify their own world outlook. Second, humanities are heavily embedded with socialist dogma; hence, they are worthy of boycotting. Third, republicans at the present moment, are unlikely to take back America’s educational regime.
But here’s the thing: republicans could prosper in trade. By emphasizing trade, republicans could help destabilize the current educational regime not only directly, but through the prosperity gained in the private sector.
Once republicans are succeeding in the private sector, more money is there for charitable minded republicans to fund private schools founded on republican principles. At that point, a real republican education — one in the history of law, metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, politics, art, manufacturing, economics — could be tried. Until then we must continue the uphill battle of being successful republicans in a hostile environment. For many of us this amounts to socio-political war — and for now we’re still on the losing side.