How to make private schools cheap as ...

[wizardwatson]

...possible.

Toying with idea of starting private school on the cheap for working families. I feel that the main barrier for many is public school is basically free daycare. When I crunch the numbers though, if you do it right you could get the cost down pretty freaking low. You can get into a private school with financial aid for $5000 per school year any day of the week. But that still is a lot, especially if you have multiple kids. I think it can be lower. If you do it on the cheap like $2000/yr base, and even lower for low income if you adjust along financial aid spectrum.

So question is, would you yank your public school kid into a private school that was "freedom" oriented w/ Christian values if it cost only $50/week?
This to me, is a much more effective strategy against the leftist agenda than "voting at school board elections". Screw that, just make a cheap school business model and leave there like TOMORROW. Much more impactful. Plus, it drains there funding.

[Invisible Man]

...possible.

Toying with idea of starting private school on the cheap for working families. I feel that the main barrier for many is public school is basically free daycare. When I crunch the numbers though, if you do it right you could get the cost down pretty freaking low. You can get into a private school with financial aid for $5000 per school year any day of the week. But that still is a lot, especially if you have multiple kids. I think it can be lower. If you do it on the cheap like $2000/yr base, and even lower for low income if you adjust along financial aid spectrum.

So question is, would you yank your public school kid into a private school that was "freedom" oriented w/ Christian values if it cost only $50/week?
This to me, is a much more effective strategy against the leftist agenda than "voting at school board elections". Screw that, just make a cheap school business model and leave there like TOMORROW. Much more impactful. Plus, it drains there funding.

The school would have to have academic rigor and quality teachers. Secondarily, extracurricular activities would be a consideration (though not decisive).

[jmdrake]

...possible.

Toying with idea of starting private school on the cheap for working families. I feel that the main barrier for many is public school is basically free daycare. When I crunch the numbers though, if you do it right you could get the cost down pretty freaking low. You can get into a private school with financial aid for $5000 per school year any day of the week. But that still is a lot, especially if you have multiple kids. I think it can be lower. If you do it on the cheap like $2000/yr base, and even lower for low income if you adjust along financial aid spectrum.

So question is, would you yank your public school kid into a private school that was "freedom" oriented w/ Christian values if it cost only $50/week?
This to me, is a much more effective strategy against the leftist agenda than "voting at school board elections". Screw that, just make a cheap school business model and leave there like TOMORROW. Much more impactful. Plus, it drains there funding.

If I had to do it over again I would have insisted on home schooling our kids. There are plans with online video lessons as cheap as $25 per month.

https://www.powerhomeschool.org/?gcl...IaAuDkEALw_wcB

With more and more parents working online this is feasible.

Edit: But for parents that couldn't do that, if people learned to cooperate with each other it could still be done. Get a retired teacher who's only job is to supervise the kids and make sure they're doing their online lessons. On the homeschool "pod" concept that became popular during COVID.

I'm curious though how to "drain their funding." They still get the taxes whether my kids go to their school or not right? Or are you suggesting that if there are fewer kids the funding will go away? Many public schools are already overcrowded so the exodus would have to be massive. I am also for more charter schools.

[Invisible Man]

I'm curious though how to "drain their funding." They still get the taxes whether my kids go to their school or not right? Or are you suggesting that if there are fewer kids the funding will go away? Many public schools are already overcrowded so the exodus would have to be massive. I am also for more charter schools.

I'm not sure how this varies from state to state, but I think the amount each individual public school receives is typically based on the number of students attending.

[wizardwatson]

If I had to do it over again I would have insisted on home schooling our kids. There are plans with online video lessons as cheap as $25 per month.

https://www.powerhomeschool.org/?gcl...IaAuDkEALw_wcB

With more and more parents working online this is feasible.

Edit: But for parents that couldn't do that, if people learned to cooperate with each other it could still be done. Get a retired teacher who's only job is to supervise the kids and make sure they're doing their online lessons. On the homeschool "pod" concept that became popular during COVID.

I'm curious though how to "drain their funding." They still get the taxes whether my kids go to their school or not right? Or are you suggesting that if there are fewer kids the funding will go away? Many public schools are already overcrowded so the exodus would have to be massive. I am also for more charter schools.

Market is parents who not only can't afford private school, but also school is basically day care. They can't homeschool.

But yes, I've even thought of jumpstarting it with minimum wage "volunteers". Retired so-and-so's who are interested in concept who work below market rates because they believe in it. In a lot of "pod" situations (many churches were doing this) parents would rotate being hall monitor for online learning. I think you could organize in such a way that a "teacher teacher" worth the money just alternates throughout the day with larger classes, cheaper monitors and online people available for help in studying.

But yeah "coop" is a buzz word to me. If I'm a parent with a job used to public school, I just want to apply and drop them off. Done.

This year of full remote sitting in the same room with a 7 and 10 yr old for the whole school year was a real eye opener. 75% of these "teachers" could be replaced by a blank wall and the kids would've been better off. Half of them played youtube videos half the time.

As David Knight said in one of his broadcasts when a friend asked "Not sure about homeschool, worried my kid might not do well." To which David said, "Well, you can't do worse!" I truly believe that.

As to the "drain their funding". It's true. we'd need mass exodus, as likely for each exodus, they'll just spread the savings over the bureaucratic plague. But we have to realize any agorist/economic secession type strategy is going to cost us money just like a political gamble costs us money. We can't have this mindset of a bad relationship where we're scared of the divorce costs. Marriage is over. Cut your losses.

Anyway, this ideas growing on me. This mask/jab situation is pissing off a LOT of parents. It's clear the communities feel they own our kids, can tell us what to do and believe that we aren't fit to teach our own kids if we don't worship at the altar of Molech. I want to make a very simply business model that can be easily copied across communities that allow parents to just yank their kids out.

An economic strategy is asymmetric to their political dominance.

Cancel public schools.
Then do the same with nursing homes.

Anyway, not gonna rant forever on this thread, but I'm very very serious about this. We need a real strategy. Voting at your local school board does jack when the people on the side of God and/or Truth are 10% or less.

We cannot "fight" it conventionally. We have to unite in economic secession. Build an ark of sanity get people on board.

[ClaytonB]

Market is parents who not only can't afford private school, but also school is basically day care. They can't homeschool.

But yes, I've even thought of jumpstarting it with minimum wage "volunteers". Retired so-and-so's who are interested in concept who work below market rates because they believe in it. In a lot of "pod" situations (many churches were doing this) parents would rotate being hall monitor for online learning. I think you could organize in such a way that a "teacher teacher" worth the money just alternates throughout the day with larger classes, cheaper monitors and online people available for help in studying.

But yeah "coop" is a buzz word to me. If I'm a parent with a job used to public school, I just want to apply and drop them off. Done.

This year of full remote sitting in the same room with a 7 and 10 yr old for the whole school year was a real eye opener. 75% of these "teachers" could be replaced by a blank wall and the kids would've been better off. Half of them played youtube videos half the time.

As David Knight said in one of his broadcasts when a friend asked "Not sure about homeschool, worried my kid might not do well." To which David said, "Well, you can't do worse!" I truly believe that.

As to the "drain their funding". It's true. we'd need mass exodus, as likely for each exodus, they'll just spread the savings over the bureaucratic plague. But we have to realize any agorist/economic secession type strategy is going to cost us money just like a political gamble costs us money. We can't have this mindset of a bad relationship where we're scared of the divorce costs. Marriage is over. Cut your losses.

Anyway, this ideas growing on me. This mask/jab situation is pissing off a LOT of parents. It's clear the communities feel they own our kids, can tell us what to do and believe that we aren't fit to teach our own kids if we don't worship at the altar of Molech. I want to make a very simply business model that can be easily copied across communities that allow parents to just yank their kids out.

An economic strategy is asymmetric to their political dominance.

Cancel public schools.
Then do the same with nursing homes.

Anyway, not gonna rant forever on this thread, but I'm very very serious about this. We need a real strategy. Voting at your local school board does jack when the people on the side of God and/or Truth are 10% or less.

We cannot "fight" it conventionally. We have to unite in economic secession. Build an ark of sanity get people on board.

You might take a look at some of Gary North's writings. He has written extensively on this topic. The problem with this "bottom-up" approach is that it gets the priorities wrong. It's true that most of these people will go on to be practical socialists (no matter what they explicitly believe), meaning, they will live at least partly on state subsidy, fall into the debt-trap, etc. The sad truth is that few of them will ever amount to much of anything in terms of social change, whether positive or negative. And the "bottom up" approach to thwarting indoctrination through government schooling has been tried in many variations and nothing much has really come of it. It's always a fizzle, never a bang.

Rather, what is needed is a "top-down" approach to changing teaching and education. It's actually somewhat obvious -- the government's own model is top-down. That's why it works (for its true aims and ends, that is, socialist indoctrination). Top-down means that you need to build an alternative education hierarchy that is rooted in private institutions that do not accept handouts from the government or are not otherwise just an organ of the State. This means private, accredited universities. There are plenty of them out there, but they tend to be quite expensive. This is a solvable problem, however. Small communities can create their own scholarship programs, there's nothing stopping them. And as more communities organize to send their best and brightest to top private universities, the more demand there will be for them, which will spur more of them to open, which will lower tuition costs.

The goal/concept being sought would be for some non-negligible proportion of these scholarship graduates to return to their home community and "import" their education. In particular, this should motivate small communities to put a premium on scholarships for graduate degrees in education itself. Yes, you also have to "close the loop" by providing employment opportunities that aren't just State jobs, meaning, you need to stand up one or more private schools in your local community where returning graduates can work. That's the point where the "top" meets the "down", in "top-down". But all of this is completely doable when you have communities where children are inculcated with humility, diligence and the other virtues that comprise a godly upbringing.

And that's where we get back to the sad truth that none of us really wants to face -- our communities have become cesspools not because of anything that is happening in Washington, DC, but because of the social, moral and spiritual rot we have tolerated within our own communities. We are very much in a similar position to the Israelites in the Old Testament. The enemy is at the walls not because the enemy is so evil, but because we have tolerated, harbored or even indulged in idolatry ourselves. Rather than pointing the finger at the symptoms (the evils of the State), we need to focus on the disease (our own sins, and repenting of them.) Then, God will move the natural means by which these problems can be righted, and swiftly! That's the missing puzzle-piece. Good ideas are available by the bushel. What is needed are real changes in each of our individual lives, families, communities, etc.

[wizardwatson]

You might take a look at some of Gary North's writings. He has written extensively on this topic. The problem with this "bottom-up" approach is that it gets the priorities wrong. It's true that most of these people will go on to be practical socialists (no matter what they explicitly believe), meaning, they will live at least partly on state subsidy, fall into the debt-trap, etc. The sad truth is that few of them will ever amount to much of anything in terms of social change, whether positive or negative. And the "bottom up" approach to thwarting indoctrination through government schooling has been tried in many variations and nothing much has really come of it. It's always a fizzle, never a bang.

Rather, what is needed is a "top-down" approach to changing teaching and education. It's actually somewhat obvious -- the government's own model is top-down. That's why it works (for its true aims and ends, that is, socialist indoctrination). Top-down means that you need to build an alternative education hierarchy that is rooted in private institutions that do not accept handouts from the government or are not otherwise just an organ of the State. This means private, accredited universities. There are plenty of them out there, but they tend to be quite expensive. This is a solvable problem, however. Small communities can create their own scholarship programs, there's nothing stopping them. And as more communities organize to send their best and brightest to top private universities, the more demand there will be for them, which will spur more of them to open, which will lower tuition costs.

The goal/concept being sought would be for some non-negligible proportion of these scholarship graduates to return to their home community and "import" their education. In particular, this should motivate small communities to put a premium on scholarships for graduate degrees in education itself. Yes, you also have to "close the loop" by providing employment opportunities that aren't just State jobs, meaning, you need to stand up one or more private schools in your local community where returning graduates can work. That's the point where the "top" meets the "down", in "top-down". But all of this is completely doable when you have communities where children are inculcated with humility, diligence and the other virtues that comprise a godly upbringing.

And that's where we get back to the sad truth that none of us really wants to face -- our communities have become cesspools not because of anything that is happening in Washington, DC, but because of the social, moral and spiritual rot we have tolerated within our own communities. We are very much in a similar position to the Israelites in the Old Testament. The enemy is at the walls not because the enemy is so evil, but because we have tolerated, harbored or even indulged in idolatry ourselves. Rather than pointing the finger at the symptoms (the evils of the State), we need to focus on the disease (our own sins, and repenting of them.) Then, God will move the natural means by which these problems can be righted, and swiftly! That's the missing puzzle-piece. Good ideas are available by the bushel. What is needed are real changes in each of our individual lives, families, communities, etc.

Well, of course we have to give God the glory. Repent or perish.

That doesn't mean you leave your kid up there roasting in the fires of Molech because "it's your own fault". It's reaching a point where people ARE realizing how bad it is and wanting to flee Babylon.

The kids are the beach head. That's who they want to enslave, eat and/or rape the most. Whether it's abortion, a slave job, a $#@!-hole for some pervert pedophile, or dumbing them down to throw them into the organ-donor pool.

I'm not trying to start a flame-war, but this "top-down, educate, it's a long game, politics is imperfect but it's all we got" approach works wonders for talking headers, Twitter influencers, bloggers, media personalities and forum posters. It does about dick for people looking for real mechanisms of change.

We are losing the long game. Both on the civil and the religious side.

Missionary type work is MORE relevant today for all the reasons you describe. To me, this is just that.

"educate" does not set us apart from the world. We can be completely worldly and convince ourselves "well, when in Rome, gotta change hearts and minds". Banding together with our MONEY and our wealth is what the early church did. Where is that?

Anyway, I could go on. Point is, I get what you are saying, but you're preaching to the choir.

You are editorializing how it all went to hell when we started worshipping Baal and how we need to get back to our roots.

I'm at the altar of Molech seeing how many kids I can pull out of the fire before Jesus comes back.

[Cleaner44]

This is how to win. Fixing public schools is a waste of time. Offering a better choice is how you beat the Marxist indoctrination centers.

A big help would be for states provide the funding to the parents instead of the teachers unions. Let the parents and the market decide which educational institutions deserve to be funded.

[jmdrake]

LOL @ thinking that any kind of "top down hiearchy" is going to fix anything. If you want to take a true Biblical approach, consider the words of Joshua. "But as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord." Noah preached for 120 years and all he could save was his own family. We sent our sons to one of the most expensive Christian private schools in the area....and they used the common core curriculum. I volunteered at one of the smaller Christian schools prior to that, tried to influence it into a better direction...and ultimately had little to effect. And some of the most hard core statists I know are Christians who send their children to private schools, liberal and conservative statists but all statists. @wizardwatson is on to something. The other big problem with the "hiearchy" is that it's too damn expensive. The private Christian schools try to keep up with the state run schools. That's why they have football teams but no auto mechanics class. And that's why the cost so much. You want people not to end up dependent upon the state? They need the tools to be independent. Try to build a top down "education hierarchy" that actually gives kids the tools to be independent...and you won't have that many students. Parents are looking at which schools will help their kids better fill in bubbles with an number 2 pencil and learn how to get into college debt on the hopes that little Johnny will rub shoulders at the Ivy League school with someone actually going somewhere with his/her life. Some will actually "make it" in that model and that will justify it all in their minds. For those who don't...well it's their own fault.

You might take a look at some of Gary North's writings. He has written extensively on this topic. The problem with this "bottom-up" approach is that it gets the priorities wrong. It's true that most of these people will go on to be practical socialists (no matter what they explicitly believe), meaning, they will live at least partly on state subsidy, fall into the debt-trap, etc. The sad truth is that few of them will ever amount to much of anything in terms of social change, whether positive or negative. And the "bottom up" approach to thwarting indoctrination through government schooling has been tried in many variations and nothing much has really come of it. It's always a fizzle, never a bang.

Rather, what is needed is a "top-down" approach to changing teaching and education. It's actually somewhat obvious -- the government's own model is top-down. That's why it works (for its true aims and ends, that is, socialist indoctrination). Top-down means that you need to build an alternative education hierarchy that is rooted in private institutions that do not accept handouts from the government or are not otherwise just an organ of the State. This means private, accredited universities. There are plenty of them out there, but they tend to be quite expensive. This is a solvable problem, however. Small communities can create their own scholarship programs, there's nothing stopping them. And as more communities organize to send their best and brightest to top private universities, the more demand there will be for them, which will spur more of them to open, which will lower tuition costs.

The goal/concept being sought would be for some non-negligible proportion of these scholarship graduates to return to their home community and "import" their education. In particular, this should motivate small communities to put a premium on scholarships for graduate degrees in education itself. Yes, you also have to "close the loop" by providing employment opportunities that aren't just State jobs, meaning, you need to stand up one or more private schools in your local community where returning graduates can work. That's the point where the "top" meets the "down", in "top-down". But all of this is completely doable when you have communities where children are inculcated with humility, diligence and the other virtues that comprise a godly upbringing.

And that's where we get back to the sad truth that none of us really wants to face -- our communities have become cesspools not because of anything that is happening in Washington, DC, but because of the social, moral and spiritual rot we have tolerated within our own communities. We are very much in a similar position to the Israelites in the Old Testament. The enemy is at the walls not because the enemy is so evil, but because we have tolerated, harbored or even indulged in idolatry ourselves. Rather than pointing the finger at the symptoms (the evils of the State), we need to focus on the disease (our own sins, and repenting of them.) Then, God will move the natural means by which these problems can be righted, and swiftly! That's the missing puzzle-piece. Good ideas are available by the bushel. What is needed are real changes in each of our individual lives, families, communities, etc.

[jmdrake]

A big help would be for states provide the funding to the parents instead of the teachers unions. Let the parents and the market decide which educational institutions deserve to be funded.

That's what Larry Elder is pushing in California. And...he just might win.

[ClaytonB]

LOL @ thinking that any kind of "top down hiearchy" is going to fix anything.

You've misunderstood what I mean by "top-down" -- I mean higher education (top) to lower education (down). I definitely don't mean political top-down. Of course that won't work, history has proved that a trillion times over.

Try to build a top down "education hierarchy" that actually gives kids the tools to be independent...and you won't have that many students.

Education is a skill/expertise in its own right. Good methods and techniques of education are not obvious and have been learned by humanity through painful trial-and-error over many centuries. So, yes, you need an "education hierarchy", meaning, you need teachers that produce other teachers (through education). Teaching and education, however, should have nothing to do with indoctrination. And when we separate the State and education, all the goodness that you have correctly identified to be missing from modern education will automatically flourish. A car-repair instruction school needs teachers who not only know how to repair cars, but have themselves been educated in pedagogy because what they're doing is not repairing cars, anyway... they're teaching.

[ClaytonB]

<snip>

While education has been used by the State to indoctrinate our children, there are no mysterious superpowers within schools. It's just ... school. So, yeah, we need a free market in education and schooling, meaning, we need to end compulsory schooling and especially compulsory government schooling. Beyond that, however, we don't need to get down into the implementation details of how the market "ought to" solve the education problem. Markets just figure those kinds of things out because people have brains... and they use them (when they're spending their own cash instead of taxpayer's money.)

I'm not trying to start a flame-war, but this "top-down, educate, it's a long game, politics is imperfect but it's all we got" approach works wonders for talking headers, Twitter influencers, bloggers, media personalities and forum posters. It does about dick for people looking for real mechanisms of change.

Based on your response, I don't think you read my post. I am the last person on Earth who will say "politics is imperfect but it's all we got". Bane would sooner say that than I would.

"educate" does not set us apart from the world. We can be completely worldly and convince ourselves "well, when in Rome, gotta change hearts and minds". Banding together with our MONEY and our wealth is what the early church did. Where is that?

That is not a civil question, it is a purely spiritual question and the answer is purely spiritual.

[jmdrake]

You've misunderstood what I mean by "top-down" -- I mean higher education (top) to lower education (down). I definitely don't mean political top-down. Of course that won't work, history has proved that a trillion times over.

Okay. I still don't know what you mean. Try this.

Higher education = ????
Lower education = ????

What I know is that it is possible (I know people who've done it) to come up with a Christ centered homeschool education plan that fits your own children, and then find like minded people and work together with them. That is what I consider "bottom up." Trying to get some large institution or group of people to agree with you first is what I consider "top down" whether you're talking about politics or education.

Education is a skill/expertise in its own right. Good methods and techniques of education are not obvious and have been learned by humanity through painful trial-and-error over many centuries. So, yes, you need an "education hierarchy", meaning, you need teachers that produce other teachers (through education). Teaching and education, however, should have nothing to do with indoctrination. And when we separate the State and education, all the goodness that you have correctly identified to be missing from modern education will automatically flourish. A car-repair instruction school needs teachers who not only know how to repair cars, but have themselves been educated in pedagogy because what they're doing is not repairing cars, anyway... they're teaching.

Yeah....no. ^That is a recipe for accomplishing absolutely nothing. And it's unbiblical. Jesus wasn't taught by a professional teacher. He was taught by his parents and the Holy Spirit. At 12 years old the "professional teachers" of His day were astounded at what He knew.

John 7:14 "14 Not until halfway through the festival did Jesus go up to the temple courts and begin to teach. 15 The Jews there were amazed and asked, “How did this man get such learning without having been taught?”

Luke 2:46-47 "46 After three days they found him in the temple courts, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. 47 Everyone who heard him was amazed at his understanding and his answers."

[Invisible Man]

Market is parents who not only can't afford private school, but also school is basically day care. They can't homeschool....
But yeah "coop" is a buzz word to me. If I'm a parent with a job used to public school, I just want to apply and drop them off. Done.

Not that I don't support the idea. But a couple disadvantages to keep in mind:

1. Populating the classrooms with kids whose parents' reason for putting them there was basically daycare is going to result in these classrooms being poor places for real education, and this will also affect any kids who are there with an actual interest in learning (both on their parts and their parents). This very factor is part of what makes most public schools so bad. Granted, the private schools will have an easier time expelling the real trouble-makers than public schools have, so it won't be quite as bad. But catering to this market will definitely drag the product down in other respects from what it otherwise would be.

2. Parents who view school this way may just always prefer the free public school over private school that's even as cheap as $50/week.

[ClaytonB]

Okay. I still don't know what you mean. Try this.

Higher education = Top
Lower education = Bottom

Filled it in for you

What I know is that it is possible (I know people who've done it) to come up with a Christ centered homeschool education plan that fits your own children, and then find like minded people and work together with them. That is what I consider "bottom up."

I would call it "end-to-end", meaning, the parents are producing the entire product, similar to other forms of self-sufficiency (growing your own vegetables, canning, etc.)

I was home-schooled. And I went to university. And graduated. (I was also public-schooled K-3 and private-schooled 3-6). So I've run the gamut, within the limited extent of an individual's life-experience. Home-schooling is suitable for many people and the growing market in home-schooling/un-schooling approaches has played and will continue to play an important role in the ongoing education revolution. However, home-schooling is not suitable for everyone, or even most people. Even if you have a traditional, stay-at-home-Mom home, it just isn't suitable for most households. Most people will prefer to pay someone to educate their children for them. Saying that this is because they don't care about the quality of education their kids receive is like saying that buying socks from a clothing store is because you don't care about the quality of clothes your children wear. No one can specialize in literally everything. So we pay others to do tasks for us that they specialize in, and this market-orchestrated division-of-labor is what gives rise to general prosperity. So, while home-schooling / un-schooling is suitable for a small segment of the population, in order to achieve a full revolution in education, we're going to need private schools.

Trying to get some large institution or group of people to agree with you first is what I consider "top down" whether you're talking about politics or education.

I think you're making the phrase "top-down" meaningless and useless by throwing too many things into that category. We don't have to worship the experts in order to acknowledge the value of their outlook. This is the trouble with the Democrat vax-hysteria... I can disagree with the experts without having to say that all experts are charlatans. I thought that would be obvious on RPF...

Yeah....no. ^That is a recipe for accomplishing absolutely nothing. And it's unbiblical. Jesus wasn't taught by a professional teacher. He was taught by his parents and the Holy Spirit. At 12 years old the "professional teachers" of His day were astounded at what He knew.

John 7:14 "14 Not until halfway through the festival did Jesus go up to the temple courts and begin to teach. 15 The Jews there were amazed and asked, “How did this man get such learning without having been taught?”

Luke 2:46-47 "46 After three days they found him in the temple courts, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. 47 Everyone who heard him was amazed at his understanding and his answers."

Well, your hermeneutical approach is busted. First of all, I'm not Jesus and neither are your friends' children, or anybody else (besides Jesus himself). So what Jesus did as a child is not normative on anybody else. Second, what is possible is not generally normative/commanded. I was home-schooled and finished a year early; when I was 17, I placed directly into Calculus I when taking my placement exams for college, which is a couple classes higher than where the average high school graduate places. Does that mean that every home-schooled kid should be able to do the same? Don't be ridiculous. Most of my friends who were home-schooled did not go to college, and of those who did, I doubt they placed as high as I did in math for the simple reason that I've always been a math nerd. It's just how my brain is wired. It's mainly about what you find interesting, more than about intelligence. Most people find numerical problems boring. I don't. So I read all kinds of math books when I was a kid and my extra-curricular study (which would not have been possible in government school, and probably wouldn't have happened in a private school, either) significantly boosted my math abilities.

It's a mistake to reason from what some people can do, to what everybody else ought to do. Most people are not able or willing (or both) to home-school their children. There's no shame or error in that.

[wizardwatson]

While education has been used by the State to indoctrinate our children, there are no mysterious superpowers within schools. It's just ... school. So, yeah, we need a free market in education and schooling, meaning, we need to end compulsory schooling and especially compulsory government schooling. Beyond that, however, we don't need to get down into the implementation details of how the market "ought to" solve the education problem. Markets just figure those kinds of things out because people have brains... and they use them (when they're spending their own cash instead of taxpayer's money.)

I always feel when the posts starting getting chopped up we've already failed.

I disagree with what you're saying but it's mainly due to the fact you are saying something else. You are saying (essentially) our mission is to get the government out of the way the details don't matter after that.

That's not a strategy, that's a goal. Your strategy is "educate". My strategy is compete asymmetrically via economic secession. They dominate political and education angles. Do something different. SACRIFICE quality of education and comfy features (gym, school nurse, bus system, nice building, christmas program, public image) in order to make a political point that: 1) we are serious. 2) this is not a game to us 3) you do not control us. If done right, it could make a big impact even if relatively a few number of kids (I'm thinking like 60 to 80 which could all be done inside a closed down retail mall location or equivalent).

We don't get to have our cake and eat it too.

Anyway, I'm talking strategy, not "substance of what we're doing". I'm way beyond that. Rothbard called it in Chapter 30 of Ethics of Liberty long ago. Libertarians suck ass at strategy, the whole movement is too busy navel-gazing to move on from how awesome their ideas are.

Based on your response, I don't think you read my post. I am the last person on Earth who will say "politics is imperfect but it's all we got". Bane would sooner say that than I would.

I only say it because 999 times out of 1000, if I were to press, "ok, educate annnnnnnnd theeeeeeeen?" it will magically turn into "vote for the guy".

Call me cynical, I guess.

That is not a civil question, it is a purely spiritual question and the answer is purely spiritual.

And the answer is we do not love one another. The love of many has waxed cold as the Lord said.

Lastly, please don't take any of this personally. I literally do not know who you are.
I doubt I can handle responding to another dissected post.

You are here though, in this place I love, so your words have a change of getting my attention.

[wizardwatson]

Not that I don't support the idea. But a couple disadvantages to keep in mind:

1. Populating the classrooms with kids whose parents' reason for putting them there was basically daycare is going to result in these classrooms being poor places for real education, and this will also affect any kids who are there with an actual interest in learning (both on their parts and their parents). This very factor is part of what makes most public schools so bad. Granted, the private schools will have an easier time expelling the real trouble-makers than public schools have, so it won't be quite as bad. But catering to this market will definitely drag the product down in other respects from what it otherwise would be.

2. Parents who view school this way may just always prefer the free public school over private school that's even as cheap as $50/week.

I get it. And I've thought about it.

The market is:

1) working class parents who can't afford much in the way of private school and ultimately school is providing day care.
2) parents who realize the public school system hates them.

Naturally, to be competitive we'd need to do two things:

1) be cheaper than a regular private school
2) have curriculum that speaks to that market

It's clearly a small market.

But with the right marketing, I think it could work.

[ClaytonB]

You are saying (essentially) our mission is to get the government out of the way the details don't matter after that.

The details matter, but none of us can armchair-quarterback the details from a keyboard. This is Hayek's Fatal Conceit. You have no idea what the education market is really demanding. Neither do I. And the government knows least of all. So yeah, get the government out of the way, and also resist the petty-tyrannical urge to substitute your own ideas about "the way it oughtta be" in its place. Until we all agree to de-escalate and de-politicize education (and money and everything else), absolutely nothing whatsoever will change for the better. We will continue our parabolic trajectory into hell.

That's not a strategy, that's a goal. Your strategy is "educate". My strategy is compete asymmetrically via economic secession. They dominate political and education angles. Do something different. SACRIFICE quality of education and comfy features (gym, school nurse, bus system, nice building, christmas program, public image) in order to make a political point that: 1) we are serious. 2) this is not a game to us 3) you do not control us. If done right, it could make a big impact even if relatively a few number of kids (I'm thinking like 60 to 80 which could all be done inside a closed down retail mall location or equivalent).

We don't get to have our cake and eat it too.

Anyway, I'm talking strategy, not "substance of what we're doing". I'm way beyond that. Rothbard called it in Chapter 30 of Ethics of Liberty long ago. Libertarians suck ass at strategy, the whole movement is too busy navel-gazing to move on from how awesome their ideas are.

Strategy is a question for those trying to play King of the Hill. Stop playing that game, and strategy doesn't matter anymore. What matters is how you (yes, you specifically) live your daily life. The rest is smoke-and-mirrors.

I only say it because 999 times out of 1000, if I were to press, "ok, educate annnnnnnnd theeeeeeeen?" it will magically turn into "vote for the guy".

Call me cynical, I guess.

If you're cynical, there is no word for what I am.

And the answer is we do not love one another. The love of many has waxed cold as the Lord said.

Lastly, please don't take any of this personally. I literally do not know who you are.
I doubt I can handle responding to another dissected post.

You are here though, in this place I love, so your words have a change of getting my attention.

Well, when I split a post, I do it in a way to try to increase the relevance of what I'm saying to the quoted section. I know that many abuse splits to twist words. You won't see me do that even against the most clueless, mouth-breathing Marxists.

[Invisible Man]

I get it. And I've thought about it.

The market is:

1) working class parents who can't afford much in the way of private school and ultimately school is providing day care.
2) parents who realize the public school system hates them.

Naturally, to be competitive we'd need to do two things:

1) be cheaper than a regular private school
2) have curriculum that speaks to that market

It's clearly a small market.

But with the right marketing, I think it could work.

I think that essentially making this a home school pod, like jmdrake suggested, would be the easiest way to accomplish this.

If there's a core group of committed parents (or just a visionary administrator who's not a parent of any students there) who are willing to commit a lot of time and energy to this, then I think it would be possible to create the place where other parents who aren't willing to commit that time and energy would only need to send their kids to occupy a seat in that already organized pod, pay their fair share of the cost, and leave the decision making up to others.

I think you're right that in many places it wouldn't be hard to make something that won't be any worse than the public schools these kids would be getting taken out of.

I don't think this rule would hold everywhere, especially in the better suburban school districts. But it would apply in a great many places.

[wizardwatson]

The details matter, but none of us can armchair-quarterback the details from a keyboard. This is Hayek's Fatal Conceit. You have no idea what the education market is really demanding. Neither do I. And the government knows least of all. So yeah, get the government out of the way, and also resist the petty-tyrannical urge to substitute your own ideas about "the way it oughtta be" in its place. Until we all agree to de-escalate and de-politicize education (and money and everything else), absolutely nothing whatsoever will change for the better. We will continue our parabolic trajectory into hell.





Strategy is a question for those trying to play King of the Hill. Stop playing that game, and strategy doesn't matter anymore. What matters is how you (yes, you specifically) live your daily life. The rest is smoke-and-mirrors.



If you're cynical, there is no word for what I am.



Well, when I split a post, I do it in a way to try to increase the relevance of what I'm saying to the quoted section. I know that many abuse splits to twist words. You won't see me do that even against the most clueless, mouth-breathing Marxists.

If we can't "know what education market demands" then we cannot "know" what the quote "government" is, since none of us can agree on specifically what is a government policy vs. a free-market policy.

When I'm following libertarian religious doctrine "I'm the market".
When I'm committing heresies in libertarian forums "I'm surrendering to my petty-tyrannical urges to substitute my distorted 'way it ought to be' as a paltry idol in the place of the almighty invisible "market" God."

Economic thought and reflection is good for deciding whether a particular action is bad or good for me and my values.

For deciding what we should all do together, it's $#@!ing useless.

Believe in Christ.

[jmdrake]

Filled it in for you

Not really. You "explained" Top vs Bottom by saying "higher versus lower" then "higher versus lower" by saying "top vs bottom." In other words, you have never actually defined anything. But...okay.

I would call it "end-to-end", meaning, the parents are producing the entire product, similar to other forms of self-sufficiency (growing your own vegetables, canning, etc.)

I was home-schooled. And I went to university. And graduated. (I was also public-schooled K-3 and private-schooled 3-6). So I've run the gamut, within the limited extent of an individual's life-experience. Home-schooling is suitable for many people and the growing market in home-schooling/un-schooling approaches has played and will continue to play an important role in the ongoing education revolution. However, home-schooling is not suitable for everyone, or even most people. Even if you have a traditional, stay-at-home-Mom home, it just isn't suitable for most households. Most people will prefer to pay someone to educate their children for them. Saying that this is because they don't care about the quality of education their kids receive is like saying that buying socks from a clothing store is because you don't care about the quality of clothes your children wear. No one can specialize in literally everything. So we pay others to do tasks for us that they specialize in, and this market-orchestrated division-of-labor is what gives rise to general prosperity. So, while home-schooling / un-schooling is suitable for a small segment of the population, in order to achieve a full revolution in education, we're going to need private schools.

And hence what @wizardwatson was talking about. Private schools are largely unaffordable. But not everyone is in a position to homeschool. So build on what's already affordable and make it more applicable. In other words he has a plan that's actually feasible. You've yet to define yours.

I think you're making the phrase "top-down" meaningless and useless by throwing too many things into that category.

Ummm...it's your phrase. And you've yet to actually define it.

We don't have to worship the experts in order to acknowledge the value of their outlook. This is the trouble with the Democrat vax-hysteria... I can disagree with the experts without having to say that all experts are charlatans. I thought that would be obvious on RPF...

Ummmm...who said anything about worshipping experts or not valueing outlooks or whatever? You're not making sense.

Well, your hermeneutical approach is busted.

Your faulty opinion.

First of all, I'm not Jesus and neither are your friends' children, or anybody else (besides Jesus himself). So what Jesus did as a child is not normative on anybody else.

Irrelevant. The point is that the the teachers of Jesus day were corrupt to the point that they were the ones that ultimately crucified Him. They weren't fit to teach anybody's children.

Second, what is possible is not generally normative/commanded. I was home-schooled and finished a year early; when I was 17, I placed directly into Calculus I when taking my placement exams for college, which is a couple classes higher than where the average high school graduate places. Does that mean that every home-schooled kid should be able to do the same? Don't be ridiculous. Most of my friends who were home-schooled did not go to college, and of those who did, I doubt they placed as high as I did in math for the simple reason that I've always been a math nerd.

You are the one being ridiculous. I guess homeschool didn't do much for you in the logic department. I'm not talking about anecdotal evidence. Statistically speaking homeschool kids do better than public school kids on average. That doesn't mean everyone goes to college. And college isn't even the point. You just totally ignored everything I said about self sufficiency. If the SHTF a college degree and the ability to do calculus won't mean nearly as much as the ability to fix a car or frame a log cabin or whatever else a parent might want to teach his/her child at home.

It's a mistake to reason from what some people can do, to what everybody else ought to do. Most people are not able or willing (or both) to home-school their children. There's no shame or error in that.

It's a mistake to think everyone would want their children to end up like you. And that's not even what is being discussed. When you figure out what's actually being talked about please respond. Until then, read the thread again.

Edit: What you are doing is called a "straw man argument." Maybe at somepoint you talked to someone who said "Everybody should be homeschooled so that they will all be math geniuses." But nobody in this thread ever said that. The point of this thread was to think of a way that parents who'd like their children to get a Christian education could actually afford to do that. Nothing that you have "contributed" (I used that term losely) comes close to addressing that. No about of "top down" or "higher education" or whatever it is you are talking about actually addresses the point raised. Please try to actually do that. Thank you.

[ClaytonB]

Not really. You "explained" Top vs Bottom by saying "higher versus lower" then "higher versus lower" by saying "top vs bottom." In other words, you have never actually defined anything. But...okay.

Someone with a PhD in theory of education/pedagogy is "the top" in the education hierarchy, meaning, they have earned the highest credentials you can get from a university. If they have also run a school, then they are even more "top", meaning, they have both education and experience in their field. A degree in education is one of those degrees that most conservative types tend to scoff as "useless". In fact, that is the very kind of degree that conservative communities should value most highly, and they should create scholarship programs to send the best and brightest children from their communities to get those degrees in the hopes that they will come back home and use that education (and/or experience) to build competitive private schools in their own community. "Bottom" is all other degrees that people might get at a university (so they can teach specific subjects). My degree and experience is in engineering. I do not have a graduate degree, so most schools would not want to hire me. But I'm willing to bet that a competitive, privately owned/operated secondary school would be willing to hire me to teach engineering prep courses if it was run by smart, competent, conservatives with an understanding of how to actually read a resume rather than just scan for credentials and round-file everything that isn't a Master's or PhD.

And hence what @wizardwatson was talking about. Private schools are largely unaffordable. But not everyone is in a position to homeschool. So build on what's already affordable and make it more applicable. In other words he has a plan that's actually feasible. You've yet to define yours.

I don't have a plan and I think wizardwatson's ideas are impractical, to put it gently.

You are the one being ridiculous. I guess homeschool didn't do much for you in the logic department. I'm not talking about anecdotal evidence. Statistically speaking homeschool kids do better than public school kids on average. That doesn't mean everyone goes to college. And college isn't even the point. You just totally ignored everything I said about self sufficiency. If the SHTF a college degree and the ability to do calculus won't mean nearly as much as the ability to fix a car or frame a log cabin or whatever else a parent might want to teach his/her child at home.

I have a degree and I can fix a car (routine maintenance and basic problems). It's not an either-or. You can have state-of-the-art education, along with practical/applied skills. Polytechnic schools and technical institutes used to teach these kinds of courses at secondary school and college levels. The State has all but killed these schools because they don't fit with "The Agenda". Rather than trying to reinvent the wheel ("bottom-up"), let's just get the State out of education enough that the market can revive known-good models of education, such as technical institutes, polytechnic schools, trade schools, and so on. A few still exist, but they're definitely on the margin and their certificates do not command the respect they once used to, both because they are so rare (most employers don't even know about them) and because the inflation-fueled labor market is all about "influence" and "marketing" these days, with very little room for substance, if any.

It's a mistake to think everyone would want their children to end up like you. And that's not even what is being discussed. When you figure out what's actually being talked about please respond. Until then, read the thread again.

I said nothing about who wants to end up like me. Feel free to re-read my posts until you comprehend them.

[phill4paul]

The average cost to educate a student per year is $12.6K per year.

So use this as a starting point. A majority of funds is taken by an over bearing administration as opposed to teachers, meals, buildings, etc.

Cut out the damn meddlesome middleman!

For $12.6K a year x 100 students. $1,260,000 per year. 4 classrooms. 25 students per class.

Schools average 42 ft. per child. So you would need a total of around 4200 sq ft.. Modular office buildings run about $150 per sq. ft. so figure that would be $630K which wouldn't include land, plumbing, electrical, air conditioning/heating. Maybe figure $1,500,000 all in. depending on where you put them and land cost.
You could run that payoff over 4 yrs. and still have over $900 thousand per year to pay teachers, electrical costs, maintenance, janitorial, etc.
4 classrooms. 25 students each.

[jmdrake]

Someone with a PhD in theory of education/pedagogy is "the top" in the education hierarchy, meaning, they have earned the highest credentials you can get from a university. If they have also run a school, then they are even more "top", meaning, they have both education and experience in their field. A degree in education is one of those degrees that most conservative types tend to scoff as "useless". In fact, that is the very kind of degree that conservative communities should value most highly, and they should create scholarship programs to send the best and brightest children from their communities to get those degrees in the hopes that they will come back home and use that education (and/or experience) to build competitive private schools in their own community.

That's nice. I don't recall anyone saying "Whatever you don't, don't talk to an education PhD." I helped my cousin get her EdD. (Doctorate in Education.) And she was one of the top principles in her school district. That said, who do you think sets up the top online school websites? It doesn't take a medical doctorate to do telemedicine. EMTs, physicians assistants and nurse practitioners do it all the time. Similarly it doesn't take an educational doctorate to organize a small education pod. You don't have to reinvent the wheel or write the curriculum yourself. You can if you want, but you don't have to.

"Bottom" is all other degrees that people might get at a university (so they can teach specific subjects). My degree and experience is in engineering. I do not have a graduate degree, so most schools would not want to hire me. But I'm willing to bet that a competitive, privately owned/operated secondary school would be willing to hire me to teach engineering prep courses if it was run by smart, competent, conservatives with an understanding of how to actually read a resume rather than just scan for credentials and round-file everything that isn't a Master's or PhD.

Okay. I thought you were advocating for top down?

I don't have a plan and I think wizardwatson's ideas are impractical, to put it gently.

Except last year a lot of people actually implemented it...so your criticism is unfounded....to put it gently.

[ClaytonB]

If we can't "know what education market demands" then we cannot "know" what the quote "government" is, since none of us can agree on specifically what is a government policy vs. a free-market policy.

*sigh

No one except a buyer or seller of a particular good or service needs to know what the market is for that good or service. That's how markets work. You let everybody worry about their own affairs and you worry about your affairs.

When the education market is unhampered by government interference, sellers are free to produce whatever goods/services they believe will sell; and buyers are free to choose from the available goods/services whichever seem best for their purposes, at the available prices. The inevitable and predictable result is that producers of education goods/services will produce the products that consumers of education goods/services demand. There is no mystery, here, it's not even controversial. Even the Keynesians agree up to this point.

Free markets don't have policy. If zucchini plants are not available in the market because there was a parasite that decimated zucchini crops, the absence of zucchinis is not a "free-market anti-zucchini policy". It's just circumstances. Only governments have and institute policies. Markets just have circumstances.

Economic thought and reflection is good for deciding whether a particular action is bad or good for me and my values.

For deciding what we should all do together, it's $#@!ing useless.

Incorrect. Suppose someone proposes a policy to build 100 replicas of the Great Pyramid of Giza in the Nevada desert to "stimulate demand for labor". This is an absurd policy (despite being likely to be applauded by the moronic Keynesians) and it is economics that allows us to see why this is absurd. "But it creates jobs"... at the expense of other jobs that could have been created in their places! In fact, I would go further and assert that economics is the alphabet of collective decision-making. Economic ignorance hampers collective decision-making because many economic fallacies seem like a good idea when phrased in the right way. "Let's have a minimum wage to help poor people." Actually, the minimum wage hurts only poor people. But it sure does sound good when a politician says, "And I wanna boost wages! We're raising the minimum wage!" and then kisses a baby while waving an American flag...

[ClaytonB]

That's nice. I don't recall anyone saying "Whatever you don't, don't talk to an education PhD." I helped my cousin get her EdD. (Doctorate in Education.) And she was one of the top principles in her school district. That said, who do you think sets up the top online school websites? It doesn't take a medical doctorate to do telemedicine. EMTs, physicians assistants and nurse practitioners do it all the time. Similarly it doesn't take an educational doctorate to organize a small education pod. You don't have to reinvent the wheel or write the curriculum yourself. You can if you want, but you don't have to.

The point is to think in terms of leverage. Give a man a fish... etc. The point is that if you're going to actually scale up to challenge The System, you have to think at the same scale as the people who run The System. And they think in terms of leverage. They didn't invent the education pipeline for giggles (actually, they didn't invent it at all, they hijacked it), rather it's about capturing and controlling the smallest group of people whose opinions can be amplified the most. By capturing and thoroughly indoctrinating educators as hardcore Marxists, this ensures that the ideology of Marxism is amplified in the most powerful way possible. Even if you have other teachers that don't believe in Marxism/leftism, they will tend to keep quiet because the deans/principals/etc. are at least passively pro-Marxist. And then the entire factory spits out generation after generation of children who are only hearing Marxist talking points, and they are not hearing any of that refuted by plain common-sense economics and social theory.

Okay. I thought you were advocating for top down?

Yes -- top is the graduate education degrees... these people know how to organize and run schools and build education curricula, etc. The degreed staff below them (bottom) are now more effective because they are part of a structure that is designed to have maximum impact in respect to shaping kids' minds. I might be a genius of music or science or whatever, but if I can't teach properly because I have some bizarre hangup that distracts the students or vice-versa, then what use are my skills and abilities? In my field, it's conventional wisdom among industry that college teachers tend to be industry-dropouts. They couldn't hack it in a "real job", so they became teachers. This is not completely true, but it's not completely false, either. But it shows that there is something deeply wrong with the education market, where teachers are often considered "dropouts" from the very industry they're supposed to be teaching to their students! So you need people with education and experience (and skills and passion) in the field of education itself to be the "top" of your hierarchy. These are the people who could organize a revolution in education if conservatives really wanted that.

[Invisible Man]

When the education market is unhampered by government interference....

But the question remains, given that the education market is hampered by government interference, how best can we free ourselves from those interferences.

Grabbing hold of the reigns of government so that we can make sure that we and our allies are the ones shaping public policy seems to be the dominant model around here (with good reason, I suppose, since this place started out with the goal of getting someone elected President). But more and more I've come to see that as at best a wasteful diversion of energies away from more potentially productive means of finding ways to live free in an unfree world, and at worst a food-intention-paved highway to the hell of the corruption that power always brings.

[ClaytonB]

But the question remains, given that the education market is hampered by government interference, how best can we free ourselves from those interferences.

The shortest answer is: the Gospel.

Unfortunately, that answer is so short that it comes with a different set of preconceived notions, one for every individual who reads it. So it has to be unpacked a bit more.

I think that many people on RPF understand the core of Ron Paul's message that the great battle of our time to restore power to the people and secure the freedom the Founding Fathers intended for this country is primarily a battle over hearts and minds. Ron Paul beat that drum over and over and over (some still don't seem to get it). The hard truth is that we need a moral revolution in people's hearts, first and foremost. Everything else will flow from that. Yes, there is a bit of a catch-22 because how will people ever have a moral revolution if they never see the possibility of living a different (and truly better) way? At this point, we're just quoting Paul: "How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? And how can anyone preach unless they are sent? As it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!" (Romans 10:14,15) The Gospel is what breaks the catch-22!!!

Grabbing hold of the reigns of government so that we can make sure that we and our allies are the ones shaping public policy seems to be the dominant model around here (with good reason, I suppose, since this place started out with the goal of getting someone elected President). But more and more I've come to see that as at best a wasteful diversion of energies away from more potentially productive means of finding ways to live free in an unfree world, and at worst a food-intention-paved highway to the hell of the corruption that power always brings.

The government itself is an inherently corrupt instrument and cannot be wielded for any good end. It is also slated for destruction, see Rev. 19:19-21. So it is wholly irredeemable. It's a complete waste of time and energy. In fact, I take excessive political involvement as a sign of God's own hampering of the wicked. He allows them to exhaust themselves on each other, so they are rendered less capable of committing the other, much more grievous crimes they would be committing otherwise. No, I'm not talking about standard political involvement, I'm talking about the House of Cards types.

Many secularists are uncomfortable with just saying "OK, let's do the Gospel thing" because (a) it feels insincere (since they themselves don't believe) and (b) it seems like... believing in magic, basically. Why should "the Gospel" work any better than "the Force"? However, I think many secularists understand that there's something about the Gospel that is different, they just can't put their finger on it (and aren't yet ready to believe, for whatever reason). These people are certainly not enemies of the Gospel and so we should make it as easy as possible for them to work hand-in-hand with the Kingdom of God, to whatever extent they are willing. Think of it like "building onramps to the Kingdom". Obviously, we cannot make the narrow path broad, but we are indeed to make the way straight, to level the mountains and raise the valleys. So we can facilitate the Kingdom without trying to create yet another variety of Health&Wealth false-gospel.

For this middle way, I think the best approach is to focus on "routing around the State" by making its "services" redundant and unnecessary for as many people who are willing to find a way around them. It is important to avoid anything that has to do with trying to escape taxation, because that is a newbie trap set by Satan himself. This is not about trying to "starve the beast" or any of that nonsense. It's about simply empowering people by giving them another choice.

Example 1. In my case, I was home-schooled and it is simply the fact that I would not be who I am (including being the implacable enemy of the State) if I had gone to government schools. Some may consider my plight regrettable but I do not. My parents were able to do what they did in terms of homeschooling in part because of the extraordinary work of the Homeschool Legal Defense Association (HSLDA). The HSLDA shows one of the most effective methods to go around the tyranny of the State. They worked to overturn a lot of bad legislation on Constitutional grounds and, in addition, they countered the strategy of harassment employed by many local school districts after unconstitutional laws were thrown out. In fact, the HSLDA employed exactly the same tactics in reverse -- make it such a pain in the butt to harass private citizens that the local school districts just start choosing to avoid the hornet's nest altogether. They filed lawsuits and/or counter-lawsuits against many local school districts who were harassing and intimidating parents into complying with their own private interpretations of the law.

Example 2. The Mises Institute has amplified the economic teachings of the Austrian school of economics to probably millions of Americans and certainly millions of people worldwide. They are not dismantling the schools or in any way attacking the Marxist system of government indoctrination. Rather, they are simply offering an alternative that people can choose. With the support of donors, they make as much of it free-of-charge as possible, and they charge reasonable fees for full courses, conferences, and so on. This shows the power of voting with our pocket-book.

Example 3. Bitcoin. Whether you believe in Bitcoin or not, the fact is that it is a serious and extremely dangerous threat to the Federal Reserve (and the worldwide fiat paper money system, generally). Once again, this shows that you don't need to "End the Fed" (even though that would also be wonderful).

We don't have to "attack" or really do anything head-on against the globalists. Instead, we need to think in terms of jujutsu. Use the enemy's own energy against him. When he lunges for the kill, use the power of his strike to injure him all the more greatly. This is the way forward. These approaches generalize and interlock. And these are just three notable examples out of countless many that could be mentioned.

Most important of all is to realize how fragile their position really is. Their "war on terror" is really a diorama of the larger reality in which their minds are trapped. The "war on terror" itself is staged. It's fakery used to bolster their tyrannical policies which would be impossible without endless war. But it's also a projection of their inner state-of-mind out onto the world. They are a bunch of paranoid schizophrenics. In their own words, "To win the war, we have to win every single battle. The enemy only has to win one battle, and we lose." That is exactly how they view freedom. And in this one case, they are actually correct! If there are any exceptions to the system of control, the entire system of control is in jeopardy.

So, for those of us who are believers and understand the inevitability of the Kingdom of God, what we need to do to create "friends of the mammon of unrighteousness" is build onramps to the Kingdom through examples like those above. Rather than thinking in terms of "how can we destroy the State?", we should think in terms of "how do we enable people to route around the State, even on a very small scale?" How do we then allow these templates of small-scale independence to be copy/pasted from one community to another, like 3D-printable models that get replicated everywhere the moment they are created anywhere. This is not only leverage/amplification, but distributed (peer-to-peer), so that the entire patchwork becomes unkillable -- even if the State stamps it out in one community, it just crops up in ten others somewhere else, and the State is dragged down into a pointless game of whack-a-mole. By building onramps to the Kingdom, we are able to make a fair trade with unbelievers, in the sense that we are opening the door for them to enter the Kingdom if they choose to do so, but we are also benefiting from their willing contributions from outside the Kingdom. Think of it like Bitcoin. There are bad people who operate Bitcoin nodes. But all users of Bitcoin benefit, even from the activity of these bad people. So, building onramps is about allowing people who are unbelievers to contribute if they want, while maintaining a spiritual separation (not trying to "bring them into the fold" and dilute/alter the Gospel to harbor/coddle them).

[wizardwatson]

I don't have a plan and I think wizardwatson's ideas are impractical, to put it gently.

wiz: Dude, you see that slave auction over there.

clay: Yeah, slavery sucks.

wiz: Dude, we just got paid. We could buy like 6 of them and just let them go.

clay: Yeah, no. Dude, you gotta change hearts and minds. They might end up right back as slaves. We need to destroy the "system" of slavery. Bad investment. Plus, you're buying a slave "deceptively" which actually distorts the perceived market price of a slave and will no doubt encourage others to simply enslave a replacement thereby rendering your action futile.

wiz: What are you talking about. We can end the "system" of slavery for 6 right now!

clay: ...sigh. OB-viously, you did not even read my post. I get you're trying to do something good, but it's just not practical. You should invest that money in educational institutions that promote abolition. Eventually, we could emancipate everyone. The point is to free the the minds from the shackles of mental slavery to ideas that go against freedom and autonomy. You aren't the first to think of this clever idea. In psychological circles we call this the "messianic complex". You are not Jesus. If God had wanted that person freed they would be freed.

wiz: Great, well you explain all that to my three when I get back.

[ClaytonB]

One bad mischaracterization deserves another...

wiz: See that dragon over there? He's evil and he kills a lot of people. He should be stopped. In fact, here are some swords, shields and helmets I found among the stage-props. I say we should go forth and defeat this dragon!

clay: I'm sorry, but those props are plastic, and that dragon breathes real fire. You will be a human hot-pocket within three seconds.

wiz: Oh, I see. So you are just happy with the dragon and perfectly fine if he goes on killing people. Now you show your true colors!!



Moral of the story: Heroics are no substitute for choosing the right tools/weapons for the job at hand...