Replies

Of course parents should control their childrens' interactions. Who else should control them?

I'm not saying that parents shouldn't exert some control -- it'd be irresponsible not to. However, parents should not control all of their kids' interactions, because outside of communes and tyrannies real life doesn't work that way. One has to deal with all kinds of people, and it's not something one picks up easily upon leaving home. Kids have to learn to deal with people early on.

In the end, it's a delicate balance of freedom and protection.

Homeschoolers tend to be quite protective in the first place, and need to be careful about overdoing it. I've known several home-schooled kids who have difficulty interacting with others, and they tend to be the ones whose parents are too protective. (I'm admittedly painting with a broad brush here, but I trust you'll see what I'm trying to get at.)

Public schools, like the army, put a lot of disparate people together in the same place, and they have to learn to live together. That's an important and useful lesson -- provided, obviously, that there is discipline to keep the bad actors either in line or out of the picture. (Lack of serious discipline is one failing of many public schools).

And even if parents are over protective, so what? Children will grow up someday and learn to interact on their own and hopefully not to repeat their parents' mistakes.

All too often they end up as ninnies. There's a reason that "momma's boy" is (or was) considered to be an insult.

I appreciate the reasoned nature of your arguement, but after this "Public schools, like the army" I disregarded everything else that followed in the paragraph

The purpose of education is entirely different from the purpose of boot camp.

Education is meant to enable the individual to reach his potential- to become the best person he can be. Boot camp is meant to develop a group men into a cohesive unit.

I'm not saying that parents shouldn't exert some control -- it'd be irresponsible not to. However, parents should not control all of their kids' interactions, because outside of communes and tyrannies real life doesn't work that way. One has to deal with all kinds of people, and it's not something one picks up easily upon leaving home. Kids have to learn to deal with people early on. In the end, it's a delicate balance of freedom and protection.

So, what is it that you're proposing?

All too often they end up as ninnies. There's a reason that "momma's boy" is (or was) considered to be an insult.

Well, I'm sure if somebody tried hard enough one could pretty much level any charge against the way children are brought up. But, that is a matter for the family to deal with, not society.

All too often they end up as ninnies.

And what evidence do you have to support this? Other than anecdotal, that is.

It is obviously your sense that the distinguishing characteristic of 'public schools' is that they operate a forced socialization scheme under the watchful eye of state functionaries trained for this express purpose, as opposed to the purpose of actually educating their charges in mathematics or english composition, for instance.

That you find this a quite reasonable social project speaks volumes, not about you particularly, but about the consequences of two generations of Americans already processed through this socialist institution. It will probably be up to the children to rescue themselves from this barbaric oppression, since I think that your views are definitely those of the majority of Americans.

Public Education is the main instrument of American Socialism, and so ought to be opposed by those who cherish liberty.