====================================================================== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. ======================================================================
So... are we supposed to be against public education? W aren't against secular, non-religious, free education available to all children regardless of economic circumstance because the state will administer this education, any more than we are against universal, free, healthcare, with equal access granted to all, because the "state" will administer that program also. We aren't against public health measures because the state administers that program. We aren't against librairies because cities administer those. We aren't against access to clean water because the state regulates that program. On the contrary, we want to improve, expand, and defend these essential socially necessary programs from the depradations of private capital; from the demands for austerity; etc. We argue for the primacy of public education, public health, public sanitation, public controlled drinking water supplies over and against privatization. Marx attacks LaSalle's position not because it demands free public education, but because LaSalle uses the proposition to continue his glorification of the state, and mystify its connections to class. I think we clearly need to defend those public services that are on short rations in the best of times, and the first to be attacked when the times aren't best. As far as American education designed to defend and promote the interests of the enemy class, well yes & no. It is the gutting of the education system that the ruling class sees as protecting its interests, not its ideological conscription into American firstism. Why do we object to charter schools? First, because many of them are simply scams. Secondly, because they are inherently discriminatory, and are a step back from the essential social functions that supposedly represent the step forward that capitalism takes as a result of the social basis of production. Thirdly, because charter schools exist and survive due to public subsidies-- the costs are not absorbed solely by the families of the students themselves but are absorbed by all. Fourthly, because there is no way that charter schools can meet the needs of any but a small fraction of the student population. Thus charter schools act as a feint, a diversion, will the federal, state, and city governments continue to allow public education to decay. Private schooling, charter schooling, home schooling are the real ideological attacks on the obligation of society to provide free, quality education for all. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joaquin Bustelo" <jbust...@bellsouth.net> <sartes...@earthlink.net> Sent: Sunday, December 27, 2009 2:29 AM Subject: Re: [Marxism] WSWS: Socialism and the defense of public education ________________________________________________ Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
