Where liberty becomes abandonment

How accepting a flawed ideology can make bad things sound good

Richard Hanania posted recently in support of privatizing education. It’s an example of over the top ideological thinking that turns good ideas to bad.

First, to state my views outside of the ideological pit Hanania has dug, I think charter schools have a purpose and value, assuming schooling is held to standards. I don’t think that’s the case with a number of implementations, and so I think there are good and bad examples, and that’s sort of the reason the results from studies have been mixed, with some showing value, some showing none, and some showing harm.

Hanania however isn’t satisfied with charter schools, and celebrates a totally unregulated system. Yglesias makes a good case against this from an empirical standpoint, but I wanted to respond to the flawed ideological ideas around liberty.

It would be helpful to remember the responsibilities toward children. I know that society has a tendency to talk about "parental rights". I don't have any desire to upset the status quo where parents assume responsibility for their children, but neither am I willing to accept the flawed view that parent own their children and can do whatever they want.

We all have responsibilities toward all children, even those of us without any. When parents accept the lead role in that responsibility, and successfully deliver that's great, and there's a lot of good reasons not to disrupt that status quo where it's working.

But it's also important to remember there are fringes around that and not accept ideological arguments that ignore those responsibilities toward children that allow others (through government) to interfere with parents that are not delivering.

So, no, unless you would hold it as an infringement on liberty for a parent to send a child to school, or any other type of activity, holding it as an infringement for society to require schooling of children is not a sound argument, and based on an antiquated idea of parents owning their children. Many bad things can and have occurred by accepting that idea, and so we should not.

I'll reiterate again that I bring this up not to introduce some radical disruption to a very useful status quo where parents usually do accept responsibility and deliver on it. In fact, we should continue to celebrate that. But neither should we allow the respect for the value of the typical parent-child bond to make us blind to realities that require us to not accept failed ideologies.

Despite all the flaws in our education system, I would strongly disagree with dismantling all government standards. Parents have not always delivered, sometimes because they didn't want to, sometimes because they are misguided, more often, because they aren't capable of. If "we" have any ability, when that happens, to ensure that children get the opportunity they deserve, we should not abandon efforts to do so.