To Destroy Public Education. Part two: The Munger Plan.

To Destroy Public Education.
Part two: The Munger Plan.
by Dave Munger

To review: the current educational system must die a violent death:

Because the things that are accomplished by the government controlled system are either unnecessary, harmful or could be accomplished in other ways.
Because even the proponents of the status-quo concede that the coercive, monopolistic bureaucracy would work best if it was run AS IF it were a private enterprise.
Because it is so resistant to change that any reform profound enough to make a difference would be destructive anyway.
Because an education system based on socialistic premises necessarily teaches socialistic values, and can't maintain neutrality on any issue, since socialist ideology is dogmatic on every conceivable issue.
Because of numerous flaws in the system that are inherent and proverbial.

Glad we could get that out of the way in a hurry.

Post-literate America demands that whenever the elimination of a government institution is proposed, the party making the proposal must present them with an alternative government program to replace it. Catch-22: the only way to remedy this would be by educating the populace under a different system, one enforcing standards alien to the society we've got now; hence, one not likely to spring forth organically.

As odious as this sounds, in order for an alternative to be put into practice in the atmosphere and for the foreseeable future, it has to be passed into law at the federal level. A solution that requires initiative from the people acting independently of politics will have to wait for a later, less political era. The solution will have to provide education free of charge to the children of "the poor," as the current system purports to do.

Easy.

Here is my proposal: The federal government will establish at least 1,000 foundations that will function much like the Boy Scouts Of America, but with less emphasis on knot tying and oaths and more on academic and vocational skills. Five percent of the (unconstitutional) federal education budget will be diverted to these foundations the first year. Every subsequent year will see an additional five percent siphoned off. After 20 years (or hopefully sooner; other bills could be drafted to divert more of the education budget to other things, like libraries and "free" tutoring services), when zero percent of the federal education budget is devoted to the current system, there will have been plenty of time for experimentation with alternatives forms of education and an extremely gradual transition from the status-quo. Any further federal funding of any kind for schools would be prohibited.

The federal funds would be used as seed money by the foundations, with no further strings attached after this point. Foundations that require more money could then seek private sponsors, making them accountable to the society they function in. Some student uniforms might sport corporate logos. Some foundations might prefer to accept a degree of local government control in exchange for licenses to use marginal fund raising methods, such as lotteries, instead.

For the children of "the poor," the educational services provided by the foundations would be as free as membership in the Boy Scouts. They would also be as free to choose which program (or programs) to enroll in as children are now free to join the Boy Scouts, Campfire Scouts or Sea Scouts.

Even private education has major shortcomings that could be rectified by the adoption of the scouting paradigm. The classroom environment itself (not just the environment in a particular classroom) is inherently hostile to boys (it rewards sitting still, and treats boyish behavior as a disease), and possibly to girls too, past a certain age. Merit badges are a better way of motivating young children than anything as abstract and maternal as grades.

It currently seems unlikely that anything like this plan will ever be adopted. If we reached a point where it became politically possible, we would already be well on the way to a laissez faire society anyway. In the meantime, the initial steps in the destruction of public education must be the adoption of every proposal that the National Education Association objects to, especially on the grounds that it would be destructive.