In this post, Richard Eskow describes the manipulation of public opinion by people who call themselves reformers.
The attack on public education, he writes, is an attack on children and our nation’s future.
The playbook has been carefully planned and orchestrated. And the media fell for it, with few exceptions. Instead of calling them “reformers,” he says, they should be known as “demolishers.”
Here is a synopsis of the playbook:
“Pretend that “budgets” are the real crisis — but never mention that corporations and the wealthy are paying less in taxes than ever before in modern history.
“Make scapegoats of innocent people to draw attention away from yourselves. For Social Security they’ve attacked “greedy geezers,” but it’s hard to come up with a catchy equivalent for kids. (“Insatiable imps”? “Avaricious anklebiters”?) So they vilify teachers instead.
“Sell a fantasy which says that the private sector can do more, with less money, than government can. (Never, never mention that private insurance provides far less healthcare than public insurance, at much higher cost. And don’t bring up the mess privatization’s made of prisons and other government services.)
“Find a name that doesn’t use words like “money making.” How about “charter schools”?
“Describe yourselves as “reformers” – rather than, say, “demolishers.” That’s why “entitlement reform” is used as a euphemism for cutting Social Security and Medicare. (Michelle Rhee even called her autobiography “Radical.” Apparently “Shameless” was taken.)
“Employ the political and media elite’s fascination with (and poor understanding of) numbers. Suggest that “standardized” and “data-driven” programs will solve everything — without ever mentioning that the truly ideological decisions are made when you decide what it is you’re measuring.
“Co-opt the elite media into supporting your artificial description of the problem, as well as your entirely self-serving solution.
“Use your money to co-opt politicians from both parties so you can present your agenda as “bipartisan” — a word which means you can “buy” a few “partisans” from both sides.”

Which brings me back to what I’ve stated several times on this blog and other places. The main problem is the incredible concentration of income & wealth and the power that flows from it. Just a few extremely wealthy individuals are driving the public education agenda of privatization. They are also buying congress. To make matters worse, President Obama seems to be catering to their wishes.
LikeLike
And, make sure all school administrators drink the kool-aid, bully teachers and destroy morale.
LikeLike
What people think of as two separate political parties in the US today can be for accurately characterized as two rival criminal gangs fighting over which gets the larger share of the booty provided by their corporate masters. Anyone who still thinks that there is a significant difference between the Repugnicans and the Dimocrats is asleep or mainlining the graft that flows from the oligarchs through one or the other of these criminal organizations operating as the oligarchs’ soldiers.
I’m mixing my metaphors a bit. I recognize that.
LikeLike
http://m.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/06/one-percent-wealthy-dominate-2012-elections-congress
This explains a lot.
LikeLike
I’m not sure I agree with the statement “the media fell for it”. I think the media is part of the problem. Concentration of the media by wealthy individuals such as Murdoch, Zuckerman and so on have a history anti-union positions.
LikeLike
There is really only one party now as under Clinton the dems sold out for money and future high paying jobs. Is there one bit of difference between Obama and the republicans on foreign affairs, war, Guantanamo, whistle blowers, deportations, taking of our rights, spying, drones killings, the financial mess created by Clinton and education and that is just for starters. As my friends grandfather taught him ” I hear real good, but I see a whole lot better.” This was stated by Celes King II to Celes King IV. The king family of L.A., not related to MLK, has over 114 years of continuous civil rights in their family. Does anyone know of another family anywhere that has done this. Celes King III was a Tuskeegee Airman, the first bailbondsman in 1947 and since to write bail bonds for civil rights leaders nationwide, he was also an advisor to three presidents. Now you know why I am the Director of Policy for the Congress of Racial Equality of California (CORE-CA). We do not take outside donations. No one controls us. That is why Celes King III separated CORE-CA form the national CORE based back east. Go look at who funds all these groups and you will see that it is really ALEC backers. Think about it and what that means. We have credibility in political circles as a result as everyone knows that we work issues not someone’s game. There is a reason Zimmer and Ratliff were elected and why legislation just went through to help to fix AB 109 or criminal justice realignment. We help disadvantaged communities across California in all areas. They are the ones who need the help not the wealthy.
LikeLike