Friday, November 13, 2020

Rothbard: Compulsory Education

According to Rothbard, the reason that the education system in the United States (and, indeed, in most modern societies as well) is deemed as wholly displeasing and continues to be a subject of heated public debate in its reformation is because it is compulsorily financed and administered rather than conducted in an institutional setting of freedom. Rothbard states that it is one of the most critical facts regarding human nature that we all exhibit an extremely high degree of diversity among individuals. Not only do we have different physical features, but we also express unique imprints within our own personalities. This individuality, it is argued by Rothbard, tends to be the cause and the effect of societal progress. When everyone learns to think differently and act in their own unique ways, then the variety of the talents and individual interests allows for specialization and division of labor on which every civilized economy is dependent on. It follows naturally from logic, then, that mandatory schooling from early childhood to early adulthood in which the curriculum and instruction methods are forced upon students is violence against their ability (or, by extension, the ability of the parents) to voluntarily obtain education that suits the individual best as would (and should) be guaranteed in a free society. Why should we force students that do not excel in mathematics to take a prescribed amount of algebra when they would not voluntarily do so? The popularity behind compulsory schooling laws as well as their consequences is rooted in tyranny and despotism because education is essentially controlled by the state. Would it be consistent with free society, such as the United States claims to be, if the state were to establish a newspaper and compel all the kids in the country to read them? Furthermore, what if the state removed production of all newspapers it deemed to be unfit for the children to read? If not, then it is time to reevaluate where the schooling system stands with respect to free society. In this essay, I will discuss two consequences that arise from a compulsory, standardized education system: the first is that it destroys the child’s individuality in favor of principles such as equality and uniformity, and it results in a curriculum that has been politicized to represent the interests of the state in control of it.

As briefly mentioned above, each individual child has a different level of intelligence, aptitudes, and interests. Because of this, the methods of instruction that are best for each individual child will be different. Thanks to the phenomenon of compulsory, standardized education, there has been a direct shift in emphasis of schooling from merely the “individual” to the collective “group” thanks to the popularization of and appeals made by egalitarian principles. Rather than individual, one-on-one teaching that Rothbard claims is the most adequate to ensure that the educational needs of each individual child is met, the principle that no one child can fall behind or pull ahead of the rest makes it so that individuality is directly suppressed by teaching all students to adjust to that of the group. Rothbard states that one of the primary problems with this is that the standards of education are consistently dumbed down to the point where the content is adequate only for the least common denominator of intelligence among students, a concession made in recognition of the fact by the state that the “dullest” students will not be able to comprehend simple topics, let alone the most difficult ones. In turn, the brightest students are hamstrung by the fact that they are not allowed to excel, while the middle of the road students might become frustrated that they are simply cogs in a machine, and not on the same level of excellence as the bright students. Due to the fact that the standards of education are consistently reduced to reflect an “equality” among students in regards to their learning, the division of interests and labor that has resulted in an economically enriching, free society is systematically being diminished in each subsequent generation. The only concept of “equality” that could apply to education policy in free society is one that recognizes each individual should have freedom of scope for the development of his faculties and personality. In a free society, let’s aim for education policy that allows individuals to excel at what they are best at (so that they know that’s what they are best at), and deviate from activities in which they do not excel. 

The second problem with compulsory education laws in regards to free society is that they are designed and executed by the state, meaning that the state can intertwine its monopoly on tyranny and coercion with its monopoly on education. By enforcing policy that mandates a child attend school and pass a specific curriculum, the rights of parents are violated in the sense that the “ownership” of their child is being seized by the state, and the rights of the child are violated in the sense that their learning is being subject to the unloving hands of the state that preaches collectivism rather than individuality. Indeed, the homogenous nature of compulsory education makes it so that education becomes a political machine in which the children being subject to such an education will be taught nothing short than whatever the state deems it necessary to learn. Thus, the content of compulsory education will come to be the teaching of a doctrine of obedience to the state. Techniques of instilling reverence for despotism and other forms of tyranny will be prioritized in such an education system. What we have in these circumstances is a group of children raised into adults that are educated to be sheep-like, overly passive followers of the state. It is evident in the way that the public school system has evolved into a place where the development of the “whole child” is facilitated rather than just the intellectual capacity. Rothbard deliberates that a compulsory education is rooted in old societies that sought to force students to think and act in a certain way that aligned with the desire of bureaucrats, such as was the case with Martin Luther and Catholicism. Private schools are no solution, because the state can exercise its monopoly on despotism to enforce legislation requiring private schools to teach the standard curriculum. Tyranny of this form, says Rothbard, is congenial to the state and bureaucracy rather than the spirit of man that requires full freedom for his development.

One of the more absorbing aspects of Rothbard’s argument regarding compulsory education laws and free society is how he states that homeschooling, a one-on-one, parent-to-child learning environment, is the ideal educational arrangement, and one that is most consistent with the idea of free society. To the extent that all parents are qualified to teach their children based on the fact that the parent’s retain “ownership” over the child and are directly informed and concerned with the child's educational needs, the parents are the perfect agents to decide in what manner the child should be learning. Even if the parents themselves can’t perform the education of their child, they will at least have the capacity to know what tutors the child should receive or even deliberate if their child has the aptitude for education at all. The parent is informed of their child’s educational needs and the price that they would be willing to pay to obtain it. At the heart of Rothbard’s argument is a call to reform the education system in a way that places a child’s educational needs in the hands of the parents rather than the state. In conclusion, Rothbard is against compulsory schooling because its potential to be used by the state as a means of controlling citizens.  

  


No comments: