The
Soyuz of Soviet California
by
Dmitry Chernikov
by Dmitry Chernikov
The Californians are going to vote on universal
preschool for children over 4. The projected costs are $2.4
billion-a-year, but that’s a miscalculation; it’s going to cost
a lot more. (Don’t ever trust government estimates.) Who will pay?
Well, isn’t it obvious? The rich! The rich are always available
as a convenient resource for whatever slick socialist scheme the
government wants to implement. They are tools, things to
be used, whenever fancy strikes the social engineers. Soaking the
rich is ever popular; how dare they be better off than the average
Californian slob! Some warn that shaking down the wealthier part
of the population has its limits; the money could dry up during
an economic downturn. Taxes may have to be extended to the upper
middle class, as well. No matter, accountants only slow things down,
figures get in the way; what do numbers matter when it’s about the
children! Maybe a raid on the neighboring states could supply
the needs of the state government, although I hear that the chieftain,
Conan the Barbarian, has a weak heart.
Now explain to me why the public in this day and age would want
universal anything. Aren’t public schools a sufficient disaster?
Why extend the failed model to preschool? The propaganda talks about
"quality" preschools. Of course it does. Socialists promise
the lives of plenty that will far outstrip that which capitalism
can offer to the masses who will elect them dictators. But that’s
the very problem. Will the government-run and government-subsidized
preschools (those that will meet the state’s "standards")
be the best means of providing preschool education for the children
of California? Or are there better ways?
There seems to be no realization that government preschools, just
like government schools, are a danger to children. They are not
goods; they are economic bads, like trash or pollution.
Children fare much better when their moral and intellectual education
takes place at home or at certain especially successful private
facilities. Public schools will actually damage your child’s mind
and heart. I expect the state preschools to do the same. Except
that it will be worse, because children will be given over to their
wardens at an especially tender age.
Then there are the government "standards." In the marketplace
all methods and standards of instruction and learning tools and
teacher training evolve to satisfy the consumers – the children
and their parents. There will be no such evolution in government
preschools. Free from competitive pressures, they will not innovate
nor improve nor meet changing market demand. Things will
change in them, alright, but only for the worse. Very soon, in the
poorer districts, there will be many cases of neglect and abuse.
And even in the better preschools there will be no incentive for
these highly-paid government overseers of the future privates of
the industrial army (the teachers unions support the initiative,
because preschool matrons would be paid salaries similar to those
of public school teachers) to raise children properly. The costs
will constantly rise, while the quality of service will decline,
as with all near-monopolies, especially since the measure will also
crowd out the successful private firms such as Montessori schools,
which, if they want to remain in business, will have to change their
curriculum and teaching methodology in order to become "acceptable"
to the bureaucrats. Further, different children and parents will
benefit from different kinds of preschools. What is agreeable to
one consumer may not be so to another, and the market allows numerous
seemingly irreconcilable consumer preferences to be satisfied. Yet
all preschools under socialization will be one-size-fits-all. What’s
more, the "size" that is supposed to fit all will likely
be one that will actually fit very few. Why do people trust the
government to adopt any sort of reasonable standards and practices
from some scientifically valid point of view? The era in which the
government attracted the best and the brightest is long gone. After
a brief period of time this will become another political problem,
about which people will talk incessantly without ever conceiving
of the superiority of private provision of education.
The program is said to be voluntary, but for how long? We should
expect calls to make preschooling mandatory shortly after the measure
passes. If it’s good for schools, why not for preschools, as well?
And the government knows better how to deal with the kids than their
parents do anyway.
Again, why universal? The market has worked to make preschool available
to the great majority of the population who want to take advantage
of it, if it is indeed an advantage. Well, some very poor families
are unable to afford it. And preschool is now taken to be a necessity
of life. So since no one (people feel) ought to be deprived of necessities,
even temporarily, that allegedly justifies redistribution. But at
best, this line of reasoning calls for some sort of negative income
tax, a bad idea but at least not an obviously insane one. If we
wait just a little bit, then the preschool industry, if left free
and private, will develop to such an extent that even the poorest
will be able pay for their children to go to their centers. Is the
vice of impatience a good reason to ruin preschools for everybody
right now? Must all children suffer because economic
progress is not fast enough?
And please don’t give me the public goods argument for preschools.
The idea is that a better-educated public is more likely to support
democracy and to make wise decisions in public affairs. Look, if
children as young as 4 in preschools will be exposed to government
indoctrination, I fear for their sanity. And, once again, the end
of the public’s being well-versed in economics and political philosophy
is not at issue; the problem is the best means to achieving
that goal. If you laughed at seeing the words "economics"
and "philosophy" in the same paragraph as "public
schools," I am not surprised. Maybe it’s time we tried freedom
in education.
The
universal preschool measure is education socialism which will shortly
prove to be a failure and an embarrassment to California. Unfortunately,
at that time it will take some imagination to see what private enterprise
would have built if the government had not nationalized the industry.
It will take imagination to see how the "rich" could have
invested the money (perhaps even into private preschools) that was
taxed away and thereby created jobs and furthered prosperity in
California. The voters will be well-advised to torpedo this wickedness
at the polls.
June
6, 2006
Dmitry
Chernikov [send him
mail] is a graduate student in philosophy at Kent State University.
Copyright
© 2006 LewRockwell.com
Dmitry
Chernikov Archives
|