They're Communists, Too
With the proposed repeal of the voucher bill set for a referendum vote this November, the arguments for why we should keep the law that was passed this year by the Legislature, despite popular opposition to it, are getting more and more interesting.
The latest argument, proffered in a lengthy treatise distributed by the conservative think tank, the Sutherland Institute, and written by its president, Paul T. Mero: The public education system is like the system of slavery in the pre-Civil War United States.
Mero's argument in his "Defending Systems and Freeing Slaves," is that the advocates of slavery justified that institution by clothing it in a paternalistic image, with the idea that slaves needed to be taken care of and kept in their role of doing the mundane work to advance society and its economy with a neat compartmentalization of the different classes.
He then argues that minorities often fail in the public school system for the same reason, that the system favors certain groups or classes and keeps the lower classes in their place. The only way to break that system, he says, is to give parents of all classes more choices in education, such as providing tuition tax credits or vouchers for private school tuition.
"Slavery was ultimately abolished by the courageous efforts of people of good will, unafraid of the consequences of freedom and trusting in the ability of all people to assume personal responsibility for their own actions," Mero wrote. The "system" became subordinate to the people. The human experience was prized above efficiency and economy. And the interests of families and children were finally held sacred, above money. People bettering themselves became the goal."
Comparing that to the present, and to vouchers, he praised the Utah Legislature for setting an example for the nation, "to make Utah a better place to live, work and raise a family."
Mero doesn't explain in his treatise why, then, the well-funded voucher proponents had to spend more than a half million dollars to defeat voucher opponents in six legislative districts, and still lost every race. And he doesn't explain why voucher supporters in the Legislature had to work so hard twisting arms, threatening to hold the bills of voucher opponents and to defeat them in the next election, to get the bill passed by one vote in the Utah House.
Cheers,
Paul Rolly
The latest argument, proffered in a lengthy treatise distributed by the conservative think tank, the Sutherland Institute, and written by its president, Paul T. Mero: The public education system is like the system of slavery in the pre-Civil War United States.
Mero's argument in his "Defending Systems and Freeing Slaves," is that the advocates of slavery justified that institution by clothing it in a paternalistic image, with the idea that slaves needed to be taken care of and kept in their role of doing the mundane work to advance society and its economy with a neat compartmentalization of the different classes.
He then argues that minorities often fail in the public school system for the same reason, that the system favors certain groups or classes and keeps the lower classes in their place. The only way to break that system, he says, is to give parents of all classes more choices in education, such as providing tuition tax credits or vouchers for private school tuition.
"Slavery was ultimately abolished by the courageous efforts of people of good will, unafraid of the consequences of freedom and trusting in the ability of all people to assume personal responsibility for their own actions," Mero wrote. The "system" became subordinate to the people. The human experience was prized above efficiency and economy. And the interests of families and children were finally held sacred, above money. People bettering themselves became the goal."
Comparing that to the present, and to vouchers, he praised the Utah Legislature for setting an example for the nation, "to make Utah a better place to live, work and raise a family."
Mero doesn't explain in his treatise why, then, the well-funded voucher proponents had to spend more than a half million dollars to defeat voucher opponents in six legislative districts, and still lost every race. And he doesn't explain why voucher supporters in the Legislature had to work so hard twisting arms, threatening to hold the bills of voucher opponents and to defeat them in the next election, to get the bill passed by one vote in the Utah House.
Cheers,
Paul Rolly
2:51 PM
| 
1 Comments:
Sometimes I wonder if they (voucher proponents) really want to improve education for all (then why not work to improve public education) or just want to save themselves a few bucks. This would be another tax deduction the wealthy could use.
There is nothing wrong with being wealthy, but investing in education for everyone (public education not just private education) improves the economy (educated people have better paying jobs and buy more goods and services), cuts down on crime (people with higher education commit less crime), improves the tax base so everyone can pay less taxes, in short, it's the best investment a people can make.
Post a Comment
<< Home