---------------------
This is a long and obtuse article. Dr. Reich presumes his false premises and builds upon them until the whole rhetorical structure totters.
This is a long and obtuse article. Dr. Reich presumes his false premises and builds upon them until the whole rhetorical structure totters.
This man is supposed to be an educator, but he is nothing more than spouter of agitprop. He doesn't intend to explain, inform, or clarify. Nothing here is designed to be logical or factual. Dr. Reich is simply putting out the Narrative, the leftist bumper sticker slogans promulgated by Central Command.
The Narrative is for the sole purpose of The Agenda, which is the dismantling of the system. The system is the structures, institutions, and philosophies of the American culture and way of life. These things are repugnant to leftists like Dr. Reich. They must be done away with.
That's why we always hear about systemic racism, income inequality, and the super rich. These are represented as the result of the current system. Thus, take down the system. Lie about the founders. Mock those who want to live their own lives free from unnecessary dictates and government burdens. Silence those who disagree. Deplatform dissenters.
The system must come down.
Now, Dr. Reich makes noises about things like the common good, democracy, and educating voters. The average person would accept these ideas for their common meaning. That is what Dr. Reich hopes, that the casual reader would agree.
That is the nature of agitprop. The Narrative is only about The Agenda. Agitprop is only about The Agenda. Dr. Reich and everyone like him are only about The Agenda. It's pernicious, deceptive, evil, and based on half truths and modified history.
Friends,
Today in my series on the common good, I’m proposing that our schools reinstate what used to be called “civic education.”
When, in 1961, I heard John F. Kennedy’s admonition that we ask what we can do for our nation, I was attending a small public high school in upstate New York. Part of the required curriculum was citizenship education. It involved a series of courses on history and government. As in most schools, some were well taught; others were taught abysmally. (Is this what Dr. Reich wants to reinstate? He calls for "civic education," which inevitably will be taught well and taught poorly, just as before. More likely, it will be politicized in service to The Agenda)
One teacher, named Ruth Lee, often pointed to a world map showing the Soviet Union, China, and most of Eastern Europe in bright red, with surrounding nations (Vietnam, Thailand, Cambodia, and North Korea) in pink. Her ongoing civics lesson was that communism was spreading like an infectious disease. If we weren’t careful, what remained of the free world would catch it.
Civic education in the 1950s and 1960s reflected many of the prejudices of that time. (The significant possibility of attack by a hostile power is not prejudice.)
Yet it at least engaged us, day after day, in the practice of thinking about the well-being of our society and the world. (How exactly does noting the encroaching threat of communism encourage thinking about the well-being of society and the world?)
Today in my series on the common good, I’m proposing that our schools reinstate what used to be called “civic education.”
When, in 1961, I heard John F. Kennedy’s admonition that we ask what we can do for our nation, I was attending a small public high school in upstate New York. Part of the required curriculum was citizenship education. It involved a series of courses on history and government. As in most schools, some were well taught; others were taught abysmally. (Is this what Dr. Reich wants to reinstate? He calls for "civic education," which inevitably will be taught well and taught poorly, just as before. More likely, it will be politicized in service to The Agenda)
One teacher, named Ruth Lee, often pointed to a world map showing the Soviet Union, China, and most of Eastern Europe in bright red, with surrounding nations (Vietnam, Thailand, Cambodia, and North Korea) in pink. Her ongoing civics lesson was that communism was spreading like an infectious disease. If we weren’t careful, what remained of the free world would catch it.
Civic education in the 1950s and 1960s reflected many of the prejudices of that time. (The significant possibility of attack by a hostile power is not prejudice.)
Yet it at least engaged us, day after day, in the practice of thinking about the well-being of our society and the world. (How exactly does noting the encroaching threat of communism encourage thinking about the well-being of society and the world?)
The ongoing examination of history and our system of government had a cumulative effect: Regardless of our politics, we began to see ourselves as the inheritors of an important legacy. That legacy was far from perfect, but it was profoundly important. (Let's see what Dr. Reich thinks is the legacy of the founders. Hint: The only things he will mention are what might be useful to his cause.)
Above all, we had an obligation to become responsible citizens. (Well, no. That is a mechanism that would hopefully produce a free, self-governing people. When we read the writings of the founders they continually reference the rights of the people vs. the oppression of government. While being a responsible citizen is certainly important, we are suspicious as to what Dr. Reich might think is a responsible citizen.)
CIVIC EDUCATION WAS LONG AGO ELIMINATED from the standard high school curriculum. (By whom? Well, by leftists. The educational system is the result of the Left's efforts to dumb down public education, including civics. They don't want people to understand our noble founding principles: God-given rights, liberty and self-government.)
Now, education is viewed mainly as a private investment rather than a public good. (Undocumented claim. And frankly, how it is viewed is not terribly relevant. People have their own opinions about how they view many things.
Above all, we had an obligation to become responsible citizens. (Well, no. That is a mechanism that would hopefully produce a free, self-governing people. When we read the writings of the founders they continually reference the rights of the people vs. the oppression of government. While being a responsible citizen is certainly important, we are suspicious as to what Dr. Reich might think is a responsible citizen.)
CIVIC EDUCATION WAS LONG AGO ELIMINATED from the standard high school curriculum. (By whom? Well, by leftists. The educational system is the result of the Left's efforts to dumb down public education, including civics. They don't want people to understand our noble founding principles: God-given rights, liberty and self-government.)
Now, education is viewed mainly as a private investment rather than a public good. (Undocumented claim. And frankly, how it is viewed is not terribly relevant. People have their own opinions about how they view many things.
But remember Dr. Reich's premise, that civics education needs to be reinstated. If indeed education is viewed as private investment, then how does civics change that? Indeed, why should we grant permission for education to tell us what should be the correct opinion?
In fact, Dr. Reich is doing what he always does: Smoke screening the real issue with ancillary diversions.)
What you learn is what you’ll earn, as the popular saying goes. (He drops this as if it's repugnant but doesn't comment.)
With inequalities of income and wealth wider than they have been in over a century, (Ahh, out come the leftist talking points. If these are actually problems, aren't they the result of decades of leftist governance?)
With inequalities of income and wealth wider than they have been in over a century, (Ahh, out come the leftist talking points. If these are actually problems, aren't they the result of decades of leftist governance?)
parents and their children face the daunting possibility of unprecedented riches for those with the “right” education, or the risk of squalor for those on the losing track. (This is just dumb. "Unprecedented riches?" Is it true that parents are choosing between "unprecedented riches" and "squalor" for their children? What?)
These days, the typical college graduate earns twice as much as someone with only a high school degree. And a high school dropout earns half the earnings of a high school graduate. (After implying that it was wrong to measure education by the private benefits, Dr. Reich does just that.
So, remember that he started with the idea that civics needs to be taught again. Well, this would be in high school, not college. The choice a student might make to go to college, trade school [which Dr. Reich did not mention], stop after high school, or even drop out, is just that, a choice.
Now it is certainly true that some choices are not great choices. But the fact that Dr. Reich doesn't like some peoples' choices is not a matter for government, and also has no bearing on if civics education should be reinstated.)
Yet if education is simply a private investment yielding private returns, (Notice the change from "mainly viewed" above to now being characterized as "simply." In other words, it was previously the prevalent view, but now it is a universal problem.)
Yet if education is simply a private investment yielding private returns, (Notice the change from "mainly viewed" above to now being characterized as "simply." In other words, it was previously the prevalent view, but now it is a universal problem.)
there is no reason why anyone other than the “investor” should pay for it. (Dr. Reich seems not to have heard of scholarships, grandparents with cash, grants, or gifts from civic organizations and businesses. Also, many businesses fund their employee's education and advancing mastery of their skills.
But beyond that, people decide for themselves what is important to them. It is their money. They may want to pursue higher education, and if so, they should pay for it. Simply because there's some sort of "common good" that might result does not give others any obligation for funding it.)
No wonder increasing numbers of parents resist paying for the education of children who are poorer or require extra teacher time and resources. (Public school is free.
Apparently we are no longer talking about civics classes at all, but rather the expense of college.)
The same attitude extends to legislatures that have been cutting funding for public universities. (Ah, so Dr. Reich has switched topics and is talking about college.
The same attitude extends to legislatures that have been cutting funding for public universities. (Ah, so Dr. Reich has switched topics and is talking about college.
We doubt that any cuts in funding has occurred. Leftists always howl about cutting funding, which never actually happens.)
If a university degree is a private investment offering a good return to the individual, they argue, why should taxpayers bear the cost? (Who argues this?
But it's a good point, ironically. As we mentioned earlier, the cost of something should not be borne by others simply because there might be some unquantifiable good to society that comes of it.)
Why shouldn’t students and their parents take out loans to cover it, just as people borrow for all sorts of other worthwhile investments, such as a new home or business? (The only reason someone would take out a loan for college is because of its highly inflated expense and because the government offers sucker terms for these loans. But no mention from Dr. Reich about government's detrimental activities.)
But education is not just a private investment. It is also a public good. (This is merely the ancillary effect. Education always ought to serve the interests and objectives of the student and the parents. Education is not for the benefit of society, though some benefit might result. "Society," i.e. government dictates, needs to stay out of private decisions.)
But education is not just a private investment. It is also a public good. (This is merely the ancillary effect. Education always ought to serve the interests and objectives of the student and the parents. Education is not for the benefit of society, though some benefit might result. "Society," i.e. government dictates, needs to stay out of private decisions.)
America’s founders knew that the survival of the new republic necessitated a public wise enough to keep power within bounds. (Three concepts repugnant to the Left: A "republic," The founders, an informed public, and limited government.
Dr. Reich puts rhetoric like this to use regardless of whether or not he really believes it.)
It required citizens capable of resolving the tension between private interests and the common good — people imbued with civic virtue. (There are no tensions if the power of government is kept "within bounds.")
AT THE CLOSE OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION OF 1787, someone was said to have asked Benjamin Franklin what sort of government the delegates had created for the people. He replied, “A republic, madam, if you can keep it.” (...not a democracy.)
What did “keeping it” require? More than anything else, education. (No, actually, the difficulty of keeping a republic is the inexorable encroachment of oppressive government into peoples' lives at the hands of power-hungry elected representatives and the unaccountable bureaucracies they create.)
“Ignorance and despotism seem made for each other,” Jefferson warned. (Which would include the ignorance that arises because of secretive government officials covering up their money grubbing schemes, and the agitprop of leftists like Dr. Reich who have ulterior motives for their advocacy.)
AT THE CLOSE OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION OF 1787, someone was said to have asked Benjamin Franklin what sort of government the delegates had created for the people. He replied, “A republic, madam, if you can keep it.” (...not a democracy.)
What did “keeping it” require? More than anything else, education. (No, actually, the difficulty of keeping a republic is the inexorable encroachment of oppressive government into peoples' lives at the hands of power-hungry elected representatives and the unaccountable bureaucracies they create.)
“Ignorance and despotism seem made for each other,” Jefferson warned. (Which would include the ignorance that arises because of secretive government officials covering up their money grubbing schemes, and the agitprop of leftists like Dr. Reich who have ulterior motives for their advocacy.)
But if the new nation could “enlighten the people generally . . . tyranny and the oppressions of mind and body will vanish, like evil spirits at the dawn of day.” (Ironic considering the great effort expended by the Left to keep citizens ignorant.)
During the colonial era, a few towns ran public grammar schools — but only for a few weeks in the winter when family farms didn’t require their children’s labor. Other towns relied on private tuition.
After the Revolution, reformers pushed for free public education. Jedediah Peck of upstate New York typified the reform movement. “In all countries where education is confined to a few people,” he warned, “we always find arbitrary governments and abject slavery.” Peck convinced the New York legislature to create a comprehensive system of public education. (It was thought that a proper education would help prevent the advance of tyranny. But the Left wants students steeped in Marxist doctrine.
During the colonial era, a few towns ran public grammar schools — but only for a few weeks in the winter when family farms didn’t require their children’s labor. Other towns relied on private tuition.
After the Revolution, reformers pushed for free public education. Jedediah Peck of upstate New York typified the reform movement. “In all countries where education is confined to a few people,” he warned, “we always find arbitrary governments and abject slavery.” Peck convinced the New York legislature to create a comprehensive system of public education. (It was thought that a proper education would help prevent the advance of tyranny. But the Left wants students steeped in Marxist doctrine.
And by the way, Dr. Reich's example was a state-level initiative. Therefore, we cannot presume such things to be appropriate [or even constitutional] at the federal level.)
The person most credited with founding American public schooling, Massachusetts educator Horace Mann, also linked public education to democracy. ("Democracy.")
The person most credited with founding American public schooling, Massachusetts educator Horace Mann, also linked public education to democracy. ("Democracy.")
“A republican (Now "republican.")
form of government, without intelligence in the people,” he wrote, “must be, on a vast scale, what a mad-house, without superintendent or keepers, would be on a small one.” (Horace Mann was prescient regarding our present-day circumstances, all of which have resulted from leftist initiatives.)
Mann believed it important that public schools educate all children together, “in common.” (Mann's opinion is o f little interest to us. He's an old dead white guy who virtually no one knows of.)
Mann believed it important that public schools educate all children together, “in common.” (Mann's opinion is o f little interest to us. He's an old dead white guy who virtually no one knows of.)
The mix of ethnicities, races, and social classes in the same schools would help children learn the habits and attitudes of citizenship. (How's that working out, Dr. Reich? Separate graduations for blacks, leftist race baiters working overtime, BLM burning down cities... Tell us again about these "attitudes of citizenship," won't you?
When is Dr. Reich going to make his case for civics classes? DEI has nothing to do with civics.)
(His project was not without fault: It emphasized Protestantism over Catholicism, for example, which was one reason Catholics created their own private schools.)
If the common good is to be restored, (Dr. Reich has not even discussed the "common good." He's only mentioned it twice up to now, and has yet to even define it. Nor has he even documented its prior existence, let alone even made the case for what he wants restored.)
If the common good is to be restored, (Dr. Reich has not even discussed the "common good." He's only mentioned it twice up to now, and has yet to even define it. Nor has he even documented its prior existence, let alone even made the case for what he wants restored.)
education must be reconnected to these public moral roots. (Out of left field comes a completely new concept, "public moral roots." Yet another thing Dr. Reich doesn't bother to explain.
Dr. Reich is a leftist, so everything is about the "common good," which translates to what's good for government, good for leftists, and good for the accumulation and retention of power.
So "public moral" roots is a fiction, a high-sounding phrase used to manipulate and divert.)
We must stop thinking about it solely as a private investment (We have the goalposts moved again, from "mainly viewed" to "simply" to "solely." This is a typical leftist rhetorical device.
This is coupled with an imperative: "We must." And no mention of who "we" is. The whole sentence is a distraction, again designed to divert and cloud the conversation.)
that may lead to a good-paying job, and revive the founders’ understanding of it as a public good that helps train young people in responsible citizenship. (He repeats his premise, now taking the form of a moral requirement.)
This requires that schools focus not just on building skills but also on teaching civic obligations. (This is developing into a caricature. Dr. Reich identifies self-interest as a bad thing regarding obtaining a post secondary education; blames the lack of civics teaching in public schools [which he has yet to prove is even true] for this; the teaching of which will clarify the obligations [unidentified] we have to society.)
What does this entail?
For starters, every child should gain an understanding of our political system, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, separation of powers, checks and balances, and federalism. (For the left these are like crosses to Dracula.)
They must understand the meaning and importance of the rule of law, and why no one should be above it, (Irony alert.)
and they need to know where these legacies came from, and why they continue to be important.
This is what we demand of people who want to become naturalized citizens. (Dr. Reich, a leftist, doesn't care about citizenship, naturalized or otherwise. He's part of those who want the invasion from our south border. He and his ilk want to system overwhelmed, which will assist in taking the system down.)
This is what we demand of people who want to become naturalized citizens. (Dr. Reich, a leftist, doesn't care about citizenship, naturalized or otherwise. He's part of those who want the invasion from our south border. He and his ilk want to system overwhelmed, which will assist in taking the system down.)
Immigrants have to pass a civics test covering the organization of the U.S. government and American history. (When I served as secretary of labor, I had the privilege of administering the Pledge of Allegiance to some of those who had passed that test and witnessing their pride and gratitude in being welcomed into citizenship.)
Every child must also grasp the meaning and importance of justice — of equal political rights and equal economic opportunity, (Dr. Reich previously decried "income inequality and "wealth inequality." Now he shifts and wants opportunity equality. This is the opposite concept to income and wealth inequality.)
Every child must also grasp the meaning and importance of justice — of equal political rights and equal economic opportunity, (Dr. Reich previously decried "income inequality and "wealth inequality." Now he shifts and wants opportunity equality. This is the opposite concept to income and wealth inequality.)
and how these two goals are related. They need to see how the economy is organized, how its rules are made, and what groups and interests have the most influence in making those rules. (This is civics? Sounds more like economics.)
They must learn about our history of racism and of genocide (This is already taught in schools...)
They must learn about our history of racism and of genocide (This is already taught in schools...)
— not, as Republican governors and legislatures across America have charged, in order to be ashamed of America (Um, yeah. Blame it on the Republicans for resisting the left's politicization of history classes with Critical Race Theory.)
— but to be aware of the moral challenges America has faced. This is a means of helping our children practice tolerance toward different beliefs, ethnicities, races, and religions. (Except Christianity, of course.)
They need to learn about basic human rights and America’s responsibilities in the world. (Quite a list. Dr. Reich presumes that children are learning none of this presently, but doesn't demonstrate it.)
Such an education must encourage civic virtue. It should explain and illustrate the profound difference between doing whatever it takes to win, and acting for the common good. (Sigh. This is getting tedious.)
Such an education must encourage civic virtue. It should explain and illustrate the profound difference between doing whatever it takes to win, and acting for the common good. (Sigh. This is getting tedious.)
The difference between getting as much as one can get for oneself, and giving back to society. Between assuming everyone is in it for themselves, and understanding that we’re all in it together. Between seeking personal celebrity, wealth, or power, and helping build a better society for all. (Dr. Reich makes these moral pronouncements as if they are binary equations. Either you're a greedy cheat who only thinks about yourself, or you are, well, woke.
It's these false equations that blur the issues, and it's intentional. Dr. Reich is bobbing and weaving towards a very particular goal. Let's see if he will show his hand.)
A CIVIC EDUCATION must also urge and equip young people to communicate with others who do not share their views. (Just like the Left does... not.)
A CIVIC EDUCATION must also urge and equip young people to communicate with others who do not share their views. (Just like the Left does... not.)
It should teach them how to listen, to open their minds to the possibility their own views and preconceptions may be wrong, and to discover why people with opposing views believe what they do. (Oh how we wish...)
It should enable them to work with others to separate facts and logic from values and beliefs, and help them find facts and apply logic together even if their values and beliefs differ. (Oh how we wish...)
These lessons cannot be learned only in the classroom. A true civic education also requires learning by doing.
Young people should develop what Tocqueville called the “habits of the heart” by taking on responsibilities in their communities — working in homeless shelters and soup kitchens, tutoring, mentoring, coaching kids’ sports teams, helping the elderly and infirm. (Huh? We thought this was government's job. People who volunteer their help are told they must stop feeding the hungry. They can't do it without a permit. Yep, you want to actually do your civic duty as you choose and as your heart is moved to compassion, but government stands in the way.)
Young people need to move out of their bubbles of class, race, religion, and ideology, (Irony alert...)
It should enable them to work with others to separate facts and logic from values and beliefs, and help them find facts and apply logic together even if their values and beliefs differ. (Oh how we wish...)
These lessons cannot be learned only in the classroom. A true civic education also requires learning by doing.
Young people should develop what Tocqueville called the “habits of the heart” by taking on responsibilities in their communities — working in homeless shelters and soup kitchens, tutoring, mentoring, coaching kids’ sports teams, helping the elderly and infirm. (Huh? We thought this was government's job. People who volunteer their help are told they must stop feeding the hungry. They can't do it without a permit. Yep, you want to actually do your civic duty as you choose and as your heart is moved to compassion, but government stands in the way.)
Young people need to move out of their bubbles of class, race, religion, and ideology, (Irony alert...)
and go to places and engage in activities where people look different from themselves and have different beliefs and outlooks from their own. They must learn to listen to them and communicate with them. (And civics will teach them this... Is Dr. Reich confusing "civics" with "civil?")
TWO YEARS OF REQUIRED PUBLIC SERVICE would give young people an opportunity to learn civic responsibility by serving the common good directly. (Sure, let's complete the indoctrination by requiring kids to be completely immersed in Marxist doctrine.)
TWO YEARS OF REQUIRED PUBLIC SERVICE would give young people an opportunity to learn civic responsibility by serving the common good directly. (Sure, let's complete the indoctrination by requiring kids to be completely immersed in Marxist doctrine.)
It should be a duty of citizenship. (There are no duties of citizenship.)
This is how we once regarded military service. (Before the Left started calling soldiers baby killers...)
This is how we once regarded military service. (Before the Left started calling soldiers baby killers...)
From World War II until the final days of the Vietnam War, in January 1973, nearly every young man in America faced the prospect of being drafted into the army. Sure, many children of the rich found means to stay out of harm’s way, (Apparently Dr. Reich doesn't remember young people burning their draft cards. I doubt many of them were rich.)
but the draft at least spread responsibility and heightened the public’s sensitivity to the human costs of war.
Richard Nixon officially ended the draft and created a paid military mainly to take the wind out of the sails of the antiwar movement, and he succeeded. (Wait. Anti-war movement? He previously told us that the rich were avoiding the draft.)
Since then, the United States has had what’s called an “all-volunteer” army — “volunteer” only in the sense that young people have taken these jobs because they were among the best they could get. (Volunteers doing their "civic duty" is mocked. But the draft is noble and "should be a duty of citizenship." That's what he told us before.)
Today’s military is composed of fewer young people from rich families than the population as a whole. (It ain't fair.)
Richard Nixon officially ended the draft and created a paid military mainly to take the wind out of the sails of the antiwar movement, and he succeeded. (Wait. Anti-war movement? He previously told us that the rich were avoiding the draft.)
Since then, the United States has had what’s called an “all-volunteer” army — “volunteer” only in the sense that young people have taken these jobs because they were among the best they could get. (Volunteers doing their "civic duty" is mocked. But the draft is noble and "should be a duty of citizenship." That's what he told us before.)
Today’s military is composed of fewer young people from rich families than the population as a whole. (It ain't fair.)
When compared with other groups of the same age, the military also has more Southerners and a higher percentage of Black Americans. Most come from the same kind of blue-collar households whose incomes have gone nowhere for four decades. (The Left has largely been in charge of government for the last four decades.)
It’s easy to support a war that you don’t have to fight in. A 2004 survey showed that the majority of young people supported the U.S. invasion of Iraq, but only a small minority were themselves willing to fight in that war. (Oh, so we need a draft. Maybe that could be the two years of mandatory service.)
Two years in the armed services or in some other service to the nation (Oops. we were being sarcastic but Dr. Reich is serious.)
It’s easy to support a war that you don’t have to fight in. A 2004 survey showed that the majority of young people supported the U.S. invasion of Iraq, but only a small minority were themselves willing to fight in that war. (Oh, so we need a draft. Maybe that could be the two years of mandatory service.)
Two years in the armed services or in some other service to the nation (Oops. we were being sarcastic but Dr. Reich is serious.)
would help instill in all young people a sense of their obligations to society, (What are these mysterious obligations? Where are these rules written?)
regardless of their family’s wealth or status. It would allow young Americans (No, it would force them.)
to connect with other Americans who differed from them by race, social class, and politics. (This is the third time he has mentioned this. He thinks that somehow people are too insulated from experiencing the vibrancy of diversity, and thus must be forced to associate with certain preferred minority groups.
So it's not about civil service with all the benefits Dr. Reich has previously described, it's about young people who need to be exposed to diversity, equity, and inclusion. Dr. Reich wants to create an army of woke youth who will support the overthrow of the system.)
(Not incidentally, it might also remind many upper-income Americans of the personal costs and risks of American foreign policy.) (Thankfully this screed is ending soon. We can stand only so many dumb generalizations.)
Public service could take many forms in addition to military service. The Peace Corps could be revived and expanded. Projects like “Teach for America” could be enlarged and extended to other service professions, like “Social Work for America.” Nonprofits could offer a range of public service work. (All of is to ensure that people are forced to part with their time and money at the government's behest. As if the government was not coercing people enough.)
All such recruits would be paid a modest stipend, (Source?)
at least living expenses plus interest payments on any student loans. (No living wage?)
That would be less than the current pay of “all-volunteer” army recruits. (But, but... Dr. Reich previously spoke approvingly of spending two years in the armed forces, which actually has a constitutionally defined job to do: Defending America against its enemies. But now he wants to pay them less to extract cheap labor out of them in service to the leftist big-government agenda.)
WHENEVER THE IDEA OF NATIONAL SERVICE COMES UP, some object that no one should be forced to serve their country. (That pony has left the corral, Dr. Reich. We all serve the government via extracted taxes and other coerced behaviors.)
WHENEVER THE IDEA OF NATIONAL SERVICE COMES UP, some object that no one should be forced to serve their country. (That pony has left the corral, Dr. Reich. We all serve the government via extracted taxes and other coerced behaviors.)
In 2003, when George W. Bush proposed expanding AmeriCorps, the editorial board of The Wall Street Journal grumbled “the entire concept of paid volunteerism is an oxymoron.” (True dat.)
Dick Armey, then House majority leader, opined, “We give least well when we give at the direction and supervision of the government. The idea that government can teach charity to America rings very hollow with me.” (True dat.)
Rubbish. Young people were forced to serve their country when we had a draft. (Yes, a constitutionally prescribed action of government.)
Rubbish. Young people were forced to serve their country when we had a draft. (Yes, a constitutionally prescribed action of government.)
We require children to attend school for 16 years in order to learn the basics. (??? Compulsory schooling is the same as conscripted work for living expenses?)
Why shouldn’t they be required to put in two years of public service, to help learn the basics of citizenship? (Well, sir. Most likely because not only is it a bad idea, it's probably unconstitutional, unproductive, and against the very idea of liberty and self-government.)
Besides, national service has nothing whatever to do with government teaching “charity.” (A summary denial.)
Besides, national service has nothing whatever to do with government teaching “charity.” (A summary denial.)
It is about teaching civic virtue. (A distinction without a difference.
Which seems to be something that schools can't teach, despite the fact that this is the premise of Dr. Reich's screed.)
Once learned, civic virtue must be practiced. ("Must." These authoritarians never let up.)
Once learned, civic virtue must be practiced. ("Must." These authoritarians never let up.)
As I hope I’ve made clear, our obligations as citizens go beyond voting, paying taxes, obeying the law, and serving on juries. (No one is obligated to vote. Non-citizens pay taxes and obey the law. And serving on juries was not a conscripted duty until the Left started modifying the law to make it an obligation.)
We owe to one another our time and energies to improve our communities and to protect and strengthen our democracy. (Are we a democracy or a republic? Make up your mind.)
This should not be thought of as “charity,” either. (Even though it is.)
This should not be thought of as “charity,” either. (Even though it is.)
It is a commitment to pass on to future generations a society that comes closer to its ideals than it was when it was passed on to us. (Which means we need yet another government program to enforce this.)
Next week, in the last of this series of essays, I will talk about truth as a common good. (Irony alert.)
Next week, in the last of this series of essays, I will talk about truth as a common good. (Irony alert.)
Thank you again for joining me on this journey.
No comments:
Post a Comment