Peter Greene, our brilliant champion of good sense and reason, writes about the specter that energizes the privatization movement. Milton Friedman, leader of unfettered capitalism, encouraged his followers to abandon public schools. We are living with the consequences of this disastrous ideology, funding failing charter schools, funding semi-literate home schools, funding intolerant religious schools, funding grifters and phonies whose only interest is profit.
We’ve discussed, many times (e.g. here and here) Milton Friendman’s ideas for education, pretty simply described as “burn down public schools and replace them with a private free market for education.” Nancy McLean summed it up like this in 2021:
He and his libertarian allies saw vouchers as a temporary first step on the path to school privatization. He didn’t intend for governments to subsidize private education forever. Rather, once the public schools were gone, Friedman envisioned parents eventually shouldering the full cost of private schooling without support from taxpayers. Only in some “charity” cases might governments still provide funding for tuition.
Friedman first articulated this outlook in his 1955 manifesto, but he clung to it for half a century, explaining in 2004, “In my ideal world, government would not be responsible for providing education any more than it is for providing food and clothing.” Four months before his death in 2006, when he spoke to a meeting of the conservative American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), he was especially frank. Addressing how to give parents control of their children’s education, Friedman said, “The ideal way would be to abolish the public school system and eliminate all the taxes that pay for it.”
Friedman liked the idea of vouchers, but mostly as a way to get the free market mainlined into the nation’s education system. And to really understand what that means, we need to understand how Friedman saw the free market.
Many public school supporters (including me) have argued that Friedman’s free market love is misplaced because of course a free market would choose winners and losers in a system with multiple tiers. Don’t you get it, we have brayed lustily– A free market education system would result in all sorts in inequality for students in school and society at large.
The ghost of Milton Friedman replies, “Don’t threaten me with a good time.”

For Friedman, the free market was not a magical engine for equality and uplifting one and all. Instead, it was a system that perfectly suits a world that is– and ideally ought to be– filled with inequality between people.
Society is filed with winners and losers, and the free market is an excellent way to sort them out. Society is inevitably, and correctly, hierarchal and unequal. Friedman wrote in Free to Choose, “Life is not fair. It is tempting to believe that government can rectify what nature has spawned,” without any sense that government might have had a hand in creating that unfairness. Nor could Friedman ever really grasp the notion that power imbalances were self-perpetuating by the system and not some sort of natural and just occurrences (Friedman never, ever came up with a convincing free market answer for racist elements of business and society).
That’s only the beginning. Please open the link and read it all. It’s an excellent description of the ideology that is undermining our public schools. Not to make society better, but to make it worse.

Diane has written about this before, but I just want to remind readers that there is a direct connection between Milton Friedman and Jeff Yass, one of the school-choice movement’s most powerful financial backers. Yass has said that when he heard Friedman speak, he asked him what one thing he could do to advance libertarian ideas. Friedman’s answer was essentially: support school choice. Yass went on to spend millions promoting school-choice policies and candidates across the country.
LikeLike
Yes. What gets me about Yass is that he is a graduate of NYC public schools. Ingrate!
LikeLike
The libertarian right spent most of the twentieth century worrying that restrictions on civil liberties were originated from a dominant government. What they never realized is that domination arises from concentrated wealth. In the Soviet model, the party controlled that wealth. In the fascist model, as in the monarchical model, wealth is concentrated in individuals who arise as kingmakers.
LikeLike
Libertarianism=Ayn Randism=Social Darwinism=survival of the fittest and tough luck to everyone else.
Uncle Miltie paid a visit to Pinochet to give economic advice, gee, what a nice guy.
LikeLike
Most people frequently confuse Libertarianism, Liberalism (and Liberals), Socialism (and Socialists, and Democratic Socialism because public discourse often compresses distinct economic and governmental philosophies into a simple left-versus-right binary.
I do, which is why I liked to post the facts from time to time to help my aging, befuddled brain to remember the differences.
Libertarianism
Liberalism & Liberals
Socialism & Socialists
Democratic Socialism
MAGA Dictator Donald John Trump doesn’t fit into any of the above.
Donald Trump’s policies as aligned with Project 2025 fall under different political labels, ranging from far-right authoritarianism according to liberals and socialists, to deregulatory capitalism among market proponents, and national conservatism or MAGA populism among its supporters.
Trump’s movement emerged prominently during the 2016 United States presidential election and draws its name from the “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) slogan. Scholars and political analysts describe it as a mix of right-wing populism, economic nationalism, nativism, and authoritarian politics.
MAGA populism is a right-wing political movement and style of leadership centered on Donald Trump that pits the “common people” against perceived corrupt political, media, and cultural elites. [1, 2, 3]
To understand what it means to be a Trump authoritarian, all we have to do is look at the list of leaders Trump admires. His roll models.
Xi Jinping
Vladimir Putin
Kim Jong Un (North Korea)
Viktor Orbán (Hungary)
Recep Tayyip Erdoğan (Turkey)
Saddam Hussein (Iraq)
Rodrigo Duterte (Philippines)
LikeLike
Among many contradictions in the MAGA approach:
No government activity to limit private economic decisions: eg, businesses are free to pollute at will, fossil fuel industry can drill on national park land, etc. Get government out of the way of money-making. This creates jobs and raises GDP.
Government is hyperactive in regulating personal life: eg, ban abortion even while risking women’s lives. No medical care for trans people. Trans not allowed to serve in the military. Ban drag queens. Remove library books that are offensive to the right. Censoring, banning are use of government to establish certain views.
Colleges and schools prohibited from teaching DEI.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Research from MacroPolo shows that approximately 73% of private enterprises in China hosted internal party committees by 2024. These cells conduct political study and can influence corporate culture, but they are distinct from formal seats on a company’s board of directors. For major tech and media companies, the government sometimes acquires small equity stakes—known as “golden shares”—that come with special voting or veto rights over content and key business decisions. Experts note that while companies may remain technically private, they operate under heavy regulatory pressure to align with national goals. In many private firms, the CEO or founder also serves as the local party secretary, aligning corporate and political priorities naturally.
I think Trump is starting to do something simliar in the United States except Trump runs his empire like a mafia Don.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jun/13/trump-don-corleone-book
The Fortune Report outlines that the Trump (MAGA regime) has invested roughly $26.7 billion across dozens of corporate equity and quasi-equity deals. His MAGA regime has committed billions in exchange for ownership in private and public companies.
Free-market groups like the Cato Institute criticize the approach as blurring the lines between government and private enterprise, labeling it “state capitalism”
Watchdogs and congressional critics point out a lack of public transparency regarding the full portfolio and potential conflicts of interest tied to administration figures or family investements.
According to political analysts and historians, Xi Jinping is widely regarded as China’s most powerful leader since Mao Zedong. While the CCP functions as the ultimate institutional authority in China, Xi has deeply aligned the party’s apparatus with his own leadership.
Scholars at institutions like the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and the Brookings Institution generally characterize Xi Jinping’s primary goal as the “Great Rejuvenation of the Chinese Nation.”
If we had two choices to make for who would be the least damaging and more honest authoritarian leader to lead United States between Xi and Trump, I would not vote for Trump.
LikeLike
Not all libertarians admire strongman criminal elements like Rand did.
LikeLike
Quote from alternetdotcom:
Back in the late 1920s, as Ayn Rand was working out her philosophy, she became enthralled by a real-life American serial killer, William Edward Hickman, whose gruesome, sadistic dismemberment of 12-year-old girl named Marion Parker in 1927 shocked the nation. Rand filled her early notebooks with worshipful praise of Hickman. According to biographer Jennifer Burns, author of Goddess of the Market, Rand was so smitten with Hickman that she modeled her first literary creation — Danny Renahan, the protagonist of her unfinished first novel, The Little Street — on him.
LikeLike
Joe Jersey, any idea why Rand was fascinated by this monster?
LikeLike
Diane, Ayn Rand was fascinated by that monster because she was a person without empathy for the victim of Hickman’s crime and she was an obvious sociopath. She appeared to admire the strong man who would defy societal norms.
Here’s what Ayn Rand thought about the indigenous peoples: Quote from search assistant: Ayn Rand believed that Native Americans did not have property rights to their land, arguing that they were “savages” who did not improve or enclose the land. She suggested that their lack of a concept of property justified the actions of white settlers in claiming the land for themselves. Rand’s views have been widely criticized for their insensitivity and inaccuracies regarding Native American cultures and property rights. end quote
LikeLike
Friedman’s view of humanity is equivalent to a view of the animal kingdom. Any government should be almost entirely hands-off, allowing genetics and instinct to rule.
LikeLike
The crucial battle has always been for people’s belief systems. One of the the biggest victory of the so-called Reagan Revolution, was public acceptance that inequality and scarcity are the unalterable norm, either because they are natural or the result of powerlessness. Of course, it might be better named, the Reagan-Clinton revolution. In response electoral victories of the GOP and the subsequent policy changes wrought by conservatives, Clinton and his Democratic Leadership Council allies, legitimized limited government, so-called “personal responsibility” (another term in this context for abdication of government responsibility. Examples include Clinton’s “ending welfare as we know it” and the Obama/Duncan assault on public education, teachers and pushing privately-governed charter schools. Milton Friedman may be one of the intellectual fathers of ascendant out-for-yourself market ideology, but without Democratic complicity, it would not have been sucessful in winning public acceptance.
LikeLike
Milton Friedman is rolling in his grave over a thousand Trump/Maga-era policies and actions, including but not limited to massive tariffs, government purchases of corporate stock, vast expansions of Executive power, restrictions on immigration and vast government resources spent on enforcement of those, massive increases in federal government spending, attempts to exert federal control over what colleges teach and over the mass media, and expansion of the so-called war on drugs. If anything, the Trump Maladministration actions more closely resemble idiotic Pat Buchanan-style protectionism than Friedman-style libertarianism.
LikeLike
Friedman would have, of course, vehemently opposed the president’s having a private army of masked thugs with more financial resources than all but two of the militaries around the world. And he would have seen Stephen Goebbels Miller for what he is–a Nazi.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m not seeing anyone reiterating our Founding Fathers’ wishes that their new-found Democratic Republic needed to have an informed & educated populace in order to function freely. And they knew that in order to be educated, there needed to be free, universal PUBLIC schools, not schools that were only for the royals, aristocracy & clergy, as was the custom in England from where they all originated.
LikeLike