Gary North: Public Schools Are Too Dangerous for Children!

Public School Control Now!

Gary North – February 16, 2018

The murder of 17 innocent high school students in Parkland, Florida reminds us that public schools are dangerous. Too dangerous for children.

Yet there are pro-public school ideologues who refuse to face the facts. They shut their eyes to reality. They spout their slogan: “Public schools don’t kill public students. Killers kill public school students.” We have heard this for 50 years. Yet the killers are always one of these: (1) enrolled public school students, (2) public school graduates, or (3) expelled public school students. It’s time to turn a deaf ear on the refrain about public schools not killing public school students.

When was the last time you heard of a mass execution of students in a private school? The next time will be the first.

When did anyone hear of a dozen or more corpses lying on the floor of a homeschool co-op?

The facts are inescapable. Students in public schools are at risk. Terrible risk. Unacceptable risk. There is no excuse for this any longer. None. The statistics are clear. Students get gunned down only in public schools.

Yet defenders of public schools never cease spouting their slogans about a constitutional right to taxpayer-funded education. They claim that this is guaranteed by the Constitution’s general welfare clause. This is preposterous. There were no taxpayer-funded day schools in 1788, not even a military academy. There wasn’t even a school at West Point. It was a fort. West Point was where Benedict Arnold had been in charge.

We need to organize . . . now. We need to go to the voters . . . now. We need to tell them what they already know but refuse to say in public: it is time to ban public schools once and for all. No more excuses. No more gradualism. Gradualism kills! In every town, every city, every county, every state, and in Congress, our voices must be heard. “Shut them down! All of them!”

There should be a school building buy-back program. Any school board that is willing to turn in its schools to the local police department should be paid. The empty schools can be then sold to private schools or even turned into business complexes. The police department should be allowed to keep the profits. We want our men in blue behind this.

County schools can be sold by the local sheriff’s office. Same arrangement. “Support your local sheriff. Turn in your schools.”

What will the students do? They can stay home and sign up for the Khan Academy. It’s online. It’s free. There would soon be a market for similar programs. Churches can create them. Retired teachers can create them. Service organizations can create them. If Salman Khan can do it, others can do it. There is a working model. This isn’t rocket science.

What about the children of mothers who work outside the home? No problem! A city or county can pay profit-seeking charter schools to enroll students. Tax support involves coercion, but it’s better to have private charter schools with armed guards than what we have now. There have been no mass shootings in charter schools. There have not been any gang-related murders, either.

What about today’s student-to-teacher ratio of 16 students per teacher. Double it to where it was in my day. Each student will sit at a carrel that touches a wall. The carrels will be in a U-formation. Each student will use a cheap Chromebook computer. The student will wear headphones to listen to online lectures and audio-visual presentations. A teacher will walk around to monitor the students from behind. The students will not know if the teacher is monitoring them. There will be few behavior problems.

What if a student gets stuck? He will raise his hand. The teacher will come over and ask what’s wrong. The student will say: “I don’t understand this.” The teacher will say: “Google it. That’s how you will learn everything as soon as you get out of school. Get a head start.”

“But,” you may say, “if that’s all a teacher had to do, then a low-paid worker could do the job. The high school could hire two or three $100,000-a-year teachers for one-time emergency instruction sessions, and the rest would be paid whatever a starting teacher is paid today.” Wrong. A teacher would be paid no more than 70% of what a starting teacher is paid today. There would be lots of applicants with B.A. degrees in education. They would be trained in college mainly in Googling.

What about hoodlums and gang members? Expel them.

What about disruptive students? Expel them.

What about teachers’ union members? Expel them. (OK, I’m just kidding. No charter school would hire them in the first place.)

Academic performance will improve. U.S. News and World Report rank the best academic high schools in the USA. The top three schools in America are run by the same charter school company in Arizona: BASIS. So is the number-five school. The ranking is here. I am sure BASIS can meet the demand.

If BASIS doesn’t want to set up schools in high-crime neighborhoods, then local entrepreneurs can do it. Cities can set up voucher programs. With no school buildings to heat, cool, and repair, no teachers’ union to placate, and no liability insurance to buy, taxes can be lowered.

I see a market for private security services for charter schools. “We pack. Kids learn.” They can hire ex-football coaches. I can see the recruiting brochure. “You’re big. You’re loud. You’re ready.”

This program is practical. We must close the public schools forever . . . for the sake of the children.

From Gary North, here.

יעלה ויבוא מן התורה מנין

יעלה ויבא בראש חודש ובמועדים

תקנו חז”ל שבחול המועד ור”ח אומרים תפלת יעלה ויבא בברכת העבודה-רצה, ויש לשאול למה דווקא בברכה זו ולא בברכה אחרת, ואפילו בהנחה שיש לאמרה בעבודה, למה לא לנסח אותה כשייכת בפרט למעין המאורע, ושוב, מה עניין כל המילים הנרדפות לזכירה, ייראה יירצה יישמע ייפקד ייזכר, וכו’, וכל הזכרונות, זכרוננו פקדוננו, זכרונות ירושלים משיח עם ישראל וכו’, והוה אמינא שבמועד נאמר נוסח המתמצת את תפלת המועד, “והשיאנו ה’ אלקינו את ברכת מועדיך לחיים ולשלום לשמחה ולשלום כאשר רצית ואמרת לברכנו, ושמחנו ביום חג הפלוני הזה, והעלנו לציון עירך ולירושלים משכן שמך, ושם נעלה ונראה לפניך בשלש פעמי רגלינו ונעבוד לפניך כימי עולם וכשנים קדמוניות, ותחזינה עינינו וכו’,” ובר”ח נאמר “אוא”א חדש עלינו את החודש הזה לטובה ולברכה לששון ולשמחה, וכו’, ויהי החודש הזה סוף לגלותנו ותחילה לגאולתנו. מזבח חדש בציון תכין, ובעבודת בית המקדש נשמח כולנו, ותחזינה עינינו וכו’.”

וי”ל שסמכו חז”ל על מטבע הכתוב, במיוחד פסוק וביום שמחתכם ובמועדיכם ובראשי חדשיכם, ותקעתם בחצצרות על עולתיכם (ובספרי – קרבנות ציבור) ועל זבחי שלמיכם, והיו לכם לזכרון לפני אלקיכם וכו’. והנה בפסוק הזה יש עניין תגבור התפלה במועדים וחודשים, וכן הקשר לעבודת הקרבנות, וכן מטרת הזכרון, וראו חז”ל להוסיף התפלה על הזכרון בימים אלו כשמתפללים על השבת עבודת המקדש למקומה.

מאתר אברהם בן יהודה, כאן.

A Jewish Professor on the New Polish Speech-Criminalization Law

Poland’s on My Mind

Legislation laying out all these prohibitions, the Pleven and Gayssot Laws, were pushed through the French assembly mostly with Communist and Socialist support and (to my knowledge) are still enforced. The suppression of discussion of the Nuremberg judgments clearly aims at preventing dissemination of the revelation that the Soviets, not the Third Reich, were responsible for the murder of 10,000 Polish officers in the notorious Katyn Woods massacre in December 1940. The French Left has sought for ideological reasons to protect the incorrect Nuremberg verdict that the Germans, not the Soviets, carried out this atrocity.

France’s neighbor to the East features even more oppressive laws punishing hate speech, Holocaust denial and Holocaust trivialization. The current German government almost equals in its systematic suppression of dissenting opinion (from what is presumed to be the Right) the former East German Communist state. My own investigation of the frighteningly illiberal German regime, however, is more than ten years old, and under the current chancellor the repression has become even more acute. There is now constant harassment, partly through state agencies, of political parties like the Alternative für Deutschland that are positioned to the right of Angela Merkel’s leftward lurching government.  But since this persecution of dissent is usually pursued under an antifascist banner, Western political commentators aren’t complaining. After all, the German people are still allegedly working to overcome their tainted national past (Vergangenheitsbewältigung)?

I mention these peculiarities of contemporary history by way of noting my reaction to the State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert expressing the “concern” of her superiors about Poland’s new law. Heather (who used to be my daughter’s friend in Rockford, Illinois) stated in a press release something that almost caused me to fall out of my chair as I read it:

“We all must be careful not to inhibit discussion and commentary on the Holocaust,” State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert said Wednesday. “We encourage Poland to re-evaluate the legislation in light of its potential impact on the principle of free speech and on our ability to be effective partners.”

On what planet, I had to ask myself, was Heather and her boss Rex Tillerson living?  All of our nice, acceptable “liberal democratic” neighbors and allies have trampled on “the principle of free speech” so often and so blatantly that by now they’ve eviscerated it in the name of antifascism, sensitivity to designated minorities, or “overcoming the past.” Why has our State Department never exhibited the slightest “concern” about these earlier, even more glaring encroachments on free speech and free inquiry?

Of course I doubt that our State Department and media would be griping if the Polish law had stopped with prohibiting Holocaust denial and Holocaust trivialization and had not also prohibited attacks on the Polish government and people. And contrary to a questionable commentary that I just saw on Townhall website, the prohibition does not prevent Poles from accusing their now dead countrymen of collaboration with the German occupation. This prohibition is limited in a manner that is not often discussed, against defaming those who represented the Polish nation during the Second World War. This refers to the Polish government in exile in London and to the massive, heroic national resistance that went on in occupied Poland. And this recent law was passed in response to the shocking description of Nazi death camps, like Auschwitz, placed on Polish soil as Polish camps. Contrary to this characterization, Polish Catholics as well as Jews were murdered in those infernos.

As Jeff Jacobi correctly reminds us in a syndicated column, most of Polish history during this troubled time was extraordinarily heroic and awakens our compassion, given the fact that the Nazis exterminated millions of Polish Catholics as well as almost all of Poland’s Jewish inhabitants. But there’s also the unpleasant fact that these co-victims of the Nazis generally disliked and distrusted each other. There was certainly no love lost between them, and, to make matters worse, during the Soviet occupation of Eastern Poland during the period of the Soviet-Nazi Pact, there was conspicuous cooperation between some Jewish inhabitants and the Soviets. Unlike the Jewish minority, the Polish Christian population hated both occupying forces equally.

When German armies occupied the town of Jedwabne in Eastern Poland, which had been formerly held by the Soviets, the townspeople took revenge on the Jewish population as Soviet collaborators. This intended revenge took the form of wiping out 340 Jewish residents. Although carried out in an isolated village, this massacre remains the greatest black mark against Polish wartime behavior. While this deed was inexcusable, it cannot erase the otherwise stunning record of Polish resistance to their hostile German invaders, which perhaps cannot be matched by any other occupied country during the Second World War. And the Poles saved tens of thousands of Jews who otherwise would have been killed. Among these righteous Poles was my Polish Catholic mother-in-law, who at risk to her own life, saved her Jewish husband.

The angry, virulent reaction to the Polish law may reflect the frustration of the American political and media establishment that they’re not getting from Poland the kind of cooperative, post-national government represented by Poland’s former Prime Minister, Donald Tusk. Tusk worked tirelessly to integrate Poland into the EU and since 2014 has been president of its European Council. Unfortunately for American officials and journalists who demand a different posture, former Soviet bloc countries lean heavily toward the nationalist Right, which has gained power in Hungary, Slovakia, the Czech Republic and now Poland. Such countries are not susceptible to manipulation in the way that Germany is, which as a nation almost revels in being browbeaten about its past sins. And unlike the submissive Germans, Eastern European peoples relish antagonizing what they view (perhaps not without justification) as an overbearing American hegemon. As an advocate of open discussion I am not pleased by new Polish law, but I do respect the Polish nation for its defiance of what some chose to call “world opinion.”

From Lewrockwell.com, here.