Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

Privatized Education System?

rated by 0 users
This post has 20 Replies | 8 Followers

Not Ranked
Male
Posts 60
Points 1,770
Schmitto2121 Posted: Sun, Jan 25 2009 9:53 PM

Do all Anarcho-Capitalists believe in privatized education? Is this kind of similar to what seperates anarchist from minarchist libertarians? How would a privatized educational system actually benefit our country? I personally do not see how It would, I think all school prior to college should be available for everyone (maybe cut it off by tenth grade, I dunno), but please help me understanding this belief and how it would work. I dont really comprehend it 100% due to ignorance.

 

Thanks.

  • | Post Points: 110
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,985
Points 90,430

Well minarchists, as far as I know, usually advocate government provision of security and arbitration and nothing else. So there wouldn't really be any difference between the two in this regard.

The answer to your question is yes and no. AnCaps believe that all education would be privately funded, but that isn't to say that all schooling would resemble the type of private schools that we currently see. There would, for example, be the possibility of the individuals within any given community pooling their money and resources to provide education for their children.

I don't know the specifics of it, due to lack of research, but schooling would change dramatically anyway. Schooling, and the marketplace, are so highly regulated that children are forced to "learn" about literature up until the age of 18 (although I always enjoyed that, so no complaints here), even if they have no wish to. In reality nobody would pay for this sort of stuff if they weren't required to, or had no interest in it.

More likely would be the case in which children/ young adults do some sort of apprenticeships or something along those lines.

Once again, I'm quite clueless about this stuff, so this is largely guesswork.

"You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows"

Bob Dylan

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 248
Points 4,355
Eric replied on Sun, Jan 25 2009 10:17 PM

It is not what seperates, a minarchist from an anarchist, as I know many minarchists that believe in private schools.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 752
Points 16,735
Sage replied on Sun, Jan 25 2009 10:41 PM

The main difference between government and market education is the former relies on compulsory attendance and is funded by taxation, whereas the latter relies on voluntary attendance and voluntary funding.

Basically, the difference is between, on the one hand, kidnapping, slavery, and indoctrination, and on the other, voluntary, mutually beneficial cooperation.

Read this: Archipelagos of Educational Chaos.

AnalyticalAnarchism.net - The Positive Political Economy of Anarchism

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 4,532
Points 84,495
Stranger replied on Sun, Jan 25 2009 10:53 PM

I think that all school prior to college is destructive and that children should be spared from being imprisoned in them.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Male
Posts 2,943
Points 49,130
SystemAdministrator
Conza88 replied on Sun, Jan 25 2009 11:14 PM


 

Ron Paul is for self-government when compared to the Constitution. He's an anarcho-capitalist. Proof.
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 3,739
Points 60,635
Marko replied on Mon, Jan 26 2009 2:09 AM

Schmitto2121:

How would a privatized educational system actually benefit our country?



Teachers wouldn`t be buttholes and pupils wouldn`t be punks.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 150 Contributor
Male
Posts 663
Points 10,885
Moderator

Private schools ARE better.

And private schools would actually have to teach what people wanted to learn. And actually have to teach. Saying that, due to the state exam system at my school I'd say i learnt a tiny amount in a particular five years of my school "career". It wasn't until i started ignoring what they are teaching me, and focussing on outside reading that I started learning.

The difference between libertarianism and socialism is that libertarians will tolerate the existence of a socialist community, but socialists can't tolerate a libertarian community.

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Male
Posts 60
Points 1,770

I dont disagree, I know that private schools are much better and great for students. But would everyone get to go to school with privatized education or only those that could afford it? I know this is similar to a healthcare arguement but for some reason I think education should be available for everyone, even those taht cant afford it.

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 4,532
Points 84,495
Stranger replied on Mon, Jan 26 2009 9:57 AM

Schmitto2121:

I dont disagree, I know that private schools are much better and great for students. But would everyone get to go to school with privatized education or only those that could afford it? I know this is similar to a healthcare arguement but for some reason I think education should be available for everyone, even those taht cant afford it.

Would everyone get to eat if food was privatized?

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Male
Posts 87
Points 2,025

Stranger:
Would everyone get to eat if food was privatized?

my thoughts exactly. not only would families have more money for private education because of lower taxes, but privatization would drive down prices to an affordable level. also, without the state, charities would definitely step forward to help the less fortunate areas(which has already been happening).

however, many people believe that this favors the rich, as they would receive a better education and perpetuate a cycle where the rich get richer(which is a pretty marxist view). while this is unfair from some points of view, is it any different from our current system?

there is also the dilemma of the lazy parent, where the parent makes no effort whatsoever to provide their child with an education. this would be as likely as a parent refusing to feed their child because they are lazy. i believe both of these cases would fall into the realm of child abuse and neglect. while abuse and neglect would be difficult to bring to the attentions of courts in an ancap society, its just as difficult in our current, intrusive state.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 157
Points 2,710

Conza88:


 

 

Awesome video, can you give me the link to it so I can favorite it?

Thanx

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Male
Posts 2,943
Points 49,130
SystemAdministrator
Conza88 replied on Mon, Jan 26 2009 6:56 PM

http://www.youtube.com/user/ST0PandL00K

There are other quality videos aswell:

The True Debate of Our Time.

An animated series exploring the substance behind the political terminology used in contemporary debates.

The research of Mr G Edward Griffin reveals how all viewpoints can be stripped down to 2 basic positions.

Discover how the different approaches of Collectivism and Individualism impact on all aspects of our lives, from human rights, governmental authority and the use of force.

#INTRO
#P1. The Nature and Origin of Human Rights
#P2. Group Supremacy
#P3. Coercion vs Freedom
#P4. Equality and Inequality under the Law
#P5. Proper Role ofGovernment

Ron Paul is for self-government when compared to the Constitution. He's an anarcho-capitalist. Proof.
  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Female
Posts 6
Points 100

Scott Jefferies:

Stranger:
Would everyone get to eat if food was privatized?

my thoughts exactly. not only would families have more money for private education because of lower taxes, but privatization would drive down prices to an affordable level. also, without the state, charities would definitely step forward to help the less fortunate areas(which has already been happening).

 

& children would get a better education :) considering the schools would have to compete. In line with the healthcare argument, rich Canadians come over to the US to get private healthcare because it's so much better than their own. Notice: most average Americans have access to this level of healthcare that only the rich Canadians can afford. Notice too: those Americans who can't afford it usually have access to a charity etc. (Once I read something about a doctor who actually gave up his job to serve the poor. Not that this normally happens or anything :P I just thought it was kinda cool) Besides it's not like we're having a "people dieing on the street crisis because they don't have tax-payed-for healthcare". Public schools = healthcare.

You might want to read "The Underground History of American Education" by John Gatto. I'm don't think it actually talks about public school privatizing, but it will definitely give you a new perspective on public schools.

Also, simply because you go to school doesn't mean your learning. Even if you get fairly good grades, it doesn't mean your learning. As far as I'm concerned, the Public School kills learning.

If you look over American history, there is this inverse relationship between compulsory education and the intelligence of the average person. In other words, when education wasn't provided by the goverment & wasn't compulsory, the average person was smarter.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Male
Posts 119
Points 2,150

Literacy rates were highest in 1912.

Where I come from, the women don't glow, but the men definitely plunder. 

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 157
Points 2,710

revolutionist:

Literacy rates were highest in 1912.

 

Can you provide a link backing your statement so that I can use it later?

  • | Post Points: 20
Not Ranked
Male
Posts 60
Points 1,770

Thank you guys very much, ive always wondered why I didnt mind socialized education but was against socialized health care, I always found it very hypocritical of myself and really understand now. Although I am still iffy, I understand the thoughts behind this much better and see the logic.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 752
Points 16,735
Sage replied on Mon, Jan 26 2009 9:50 PM

Conza88:
The research of Mr G Edward Griffin reveals how all viewpoints can be stripped down to 2 basic positions.

Discover how the different approaches of Collectivism and Individualism impact on all aspects of our lives, from human rights, governmental authority and the use of force.

Collectivism vs. Individualism is a bogus dichotomy. Griffin himself is a collectivist: he is part of the FreedomForce International collective.

A much more useful dichotomy is between aggression and nonaggression, or initiatory coercion and voluntarism.

AnalyticalAnarchism.net - The Positive Political Economy of Anarchism

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Posts 3,739
Points 60,635
Marko replied on Tue, Jan 27 2009 12:18 AM

Schmitto2121:

I dont disagree, I know that private schools are much better and great for students. But would everyone get to go to school with privatized education or only those that could afford it?

Don`t be silly. Education is actually extremely cheap. You need to pay for the teacher (100% of an average salary) and for the classroom (30% of an average salary) divided by 30 (the number of pupils). Thats about 4.5% of an average man`s paycheck. It means a couple that is renting (or paying off house credit) can stil school 6 or 7 children at the same time, as can a single parent who is a home owner.

And that is provided weekly hours for pupils don`t get slashed in half as they probably would since most of the stuff on the programmes today are useless. So you can easily double that number to something like 13 of the bastards.

And again that is not taking into account that market will create supply wherever there is demand, so sub-standard schools will spring up for those who can only afford those, if indeed there will be such people. (Actually they probably wouldn`t be seperate schools, but seperate programmes.)

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 50 Contributor
Male
Posts 2,943
Points 49,130
SystemAdministrator
Conza88 replied on Tue, Jan 27 2009 2:16 AM

Sage:

Conza88:
The research of Mr G Edward Griffin reveals how all viewpoints can be stripped down to 2 basic positions.

Discover how the different approaches of Collectivism and Individualism impact on all aspects of our lives, from human rights, governmental authority and the use of force.

Collectivism vs. Individualism is a bogus dichotomy. Griffin himself is a collectivist: he is part of the FreedomForce International collective.

A much more useful dichotomy is between aggression and nonaggression, or initiatory coercion and voluntarism.

Confused Seriously... this comes to mind:

30. Strategy for Liberty - Ethics of Liberty by Murray Rothbard

It might be thought that the libertarian, the person committed to the “natural system of liberty” (in Adam Smith’s phrase), almost by definition holds the goal of liberty as his highest political end. But this is often not true; for many libertarians, the desire for self-expression, or for bearing witness to the truth of the excellence of liberty, frequently takes precedence over the goal of the triumph of liberty in the real world. Yet surely, as will be seen further below, the victory of liberty will never come to pass unless the goal of victory in the real world takes precedence over more esthetic and passive considerations.

Ron Paul is for self-government when compared to the Constitution. He's an anarcho-capitalist. Proof.
  • | Post Points: 5
Page 1 of 1 (21 items) | RSS