A reader suggests where to find a nation-state where the government truly leaves you alone to do whatever you want:
| As I have read here and there on the blogosphere, if you really want a truly individualistic, no governmental “interference”, no taxes kind of society, go to Somalia.
On the other hand, I’ve also been reading about man-made nation-states on the high seas. Presumably, when they don’t get what they want, all the pooh-bahs will pack their bags and become expatriates on a floating gated community. If this works out anything like ed reform, they’re in for a rough ride (hurricanes anyone?). Education reform is a scam, of course, but very few people will be headed to Somalia, they’ve convinced folks they can have their cake and eat it too. With any luck maybe wise people can turn this around! |
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Don’t know where exactly to put this comment, so I’ll drop it here. I opened my Word for the Day email and found today’s word (phrase) to be most appropriate in the charter school debate: cui bono (to whose benefit?). We must always be asking ourselves this question when it comes to education reform. Sadly, the answer is not “the children”.
I once asked a libertarian why, if they think having no state is best, they don’t hold up Somalia as their ideal.
Apparently “failed states” where the state has collapsed are the wrong type of stateless nation. Their ideal has to be somewhere the state has deliberately chosen to abolish itself.
Presumably they only like stateless utopias which are set up by the state.
I have a lot of respect for libertarians because they do not support anarchy but the U.S. Constitution. While we may have some minor differences, I find the “drama” behind this post humorous.
I really do not see people calling for anarchy but I do see them calling for supporting a LIMITED Govt. per the U.S. Constitution.
The 10th Amendment spells it out clearly, The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
States have their own DOE’s. Local communities have their School Boards. Why is there a “NEED” for another layer of bureaucracy?
We have 4,200 employees in the federal Department of Education making an average of $103,000 a year. This money would be better spent in local classrooms and there is NO good reason to have bureaucrats so far removed from our local communities micromanaging the classrooms.
Sorry, but I’ve had virtual discussions with many libertarians and I have come to the conclusion that it is a cult and dogma that works out great for billionaires like Steve Forbes, the Koch brothers or Pete Peterson but not ordinary Americans. Libertarians are totally opposed to such programs as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment insurance and yes, public schools. One libertarian kept referring to the government as the gooferment, over and over. He did not even believe in public schools of any sort. He felt that it was up to the parents to educate the children on their own, home schooling or private schools. That is insane. He was even for privatizing the roads, the police and other public services that we take for granted. Reading about libertarians like Rand and Ron Paul is enough to give you the vomits. They always hide behind THEIR interpretation of the Constitution which is pretty skewed and twisted. They think that taxes are theft, they do not believe in a commons or that we are a society with common interests and goals. In their world, it’s every man, woman or child for himself. In a sane society, this awful cult would just be a fringe group to be laughed off the stage of history. I loathe and despise libertarianism to the nth degree.
I’ve noticed as a summertime EMT/Firefighter they sure don’t hesitate to call us when they have a need. Ayn Rand’s revenge hit here though. Budget cuts and a refusal to raise taxes on the “job creators” has caused us to close several stations and lengthens our response times. This made it harder for a local large corporation to expand, the county feared they couldn’t provide adequate coverage. They could provide their own fire department if they really believed in what they preach. I am sure they will call us if they need us though.
If this is really the level of the debate, I can play. If you want to live where the government will never leave you alone, head out to North Korea.
I don’t think taking any posters position and endowing it with your conception of the most extreme version of that position and criticizing that extreme version is very helpful. No advocate of public education is secretly arguing that the government making all decisions for all individuals all the time. No advocate of school choice is secretly arguing in favor of anarchy.
No one said that. This was a response to libertarians who want zero government. Cheap shot.
Diane
Perhaps I missed the posts of libertarians advocating anarchy. Typically even the most radical ones I know of are in favor of a functioning legal system. For that, you need a government.
Your comment was silly.. No one on this blog advocates the abolition of the private sector. Cheap shot.
Diane
Sigh. No one on this blog advocates the abolition of the public sector. That was, of course, my point.
Actually, there are politicians that advocate nearly that very thing. “Government small enough to drown in a bathtub.” –Grover Norquist. Also, many comment that the federal government has no role in education. Constitutionally they would be correct except for civil rights issues requiring equal rights for all.
They may advocate for a smaller government, but even the most extreme politicians are not advocating anarchy. The point of my original post is that constructing straw men, on either side of any debate, is not very helpful.
No one constructed a straw man other than you.
You write often with great condescension towards the many educators who read this blog. You seem to have zero empathy for those who teach America’s children. No one here is one of your economist mind games. They have real lives dealing with real children and are under enormous pressure to produce higher scores on meaningless tests or be fired. You really don’t get it.
But didn’t you say that this post was in response to “libertarians who who want zero government”? I am just pointing out that there are no libertarians that want zero government, so the original post was not a response to any actual position.
I try to respond to the actual positions people take here,so I would appreciate it if anyone would point out if I am responding to an argument that posters are not giving in their post. I am sensitive to this because I have been rudely insulted here by a poster that completely misread a post and had to point out to several others that I was not making the argument they accused me of making.
There were many comments on this blog from parents who are home schooling and want government to get out of the way. Didn’t you read them?
There are many comments about a reduced role of government in education. I have never seen a post here arguing in favor of anarchy. I think it is important to remember that advocating for school choice and advocating for anarchy are not the same thing.
I have underestimated the absurdity of libertarians.
I found this article by a libertarian arguing that Somalia is better off without a state:
http://www.libertariannews.org/2011/06/30/anarchy-in-somalia/
That’s fascinating! Thank you for posting it.