Traditional Education?

    I know public and charter school educators and constantly hear their perspectives. The dismantling of the public school system that educated me, to the degree I can claim such distinction, continues. And I am still shaken that my alma mater, Germantown High School, admittedly not even at the all-time apex of its academic fame when I attended forty-three years ago, but still capable of graduating reasonably literate students, has for “budgetary” reasons, been put up for salvage, while several Charter schools have been purpose built to service the same neighborhood.

  

  After sifting through competing political ideologies, which are about ‘something else’ – not education, weighing various partisan anecdotes for and against traditional public education, and surveying a small portion of serious academic researches, some employing such methodologies and formulae as “Stochastic Frontier Analysis” and “Fisher’s inverse Chi-squared test”, and locally, years of data from the Pennsylvania System of School Assessment (PSSA) and its Annual Yearly Progress rankings (AYP), I found that Charter Schools, as a category, are statistically no better at arriving at desired proficiencies than traditional public schools. Surprised? I was! And after years (in some places decades) of being “no better”, public money is still building new Charter Schools, while still serviceable traditional public schools are closing. Moreover, there is a distinct lack of controversy over the extended mediocrity of the “Charter Schools”, with their advantages of preferred student selection, disciplinary flexibility, targeted-interest curriculums, freedom to employ innovative educational ideas, decentralized academic authority, no mandated (Social) support services, and other options and tools conceded by the same Federal, State and city authorities which are, in a mystification of laws and rules, somehow constrained from granting similar utilities to traditional public schools.

    

  Discovering incongruence between hype and reality I was left to marvel at the reciprocating manipulation. On one side of the political spectrum, those induced to identify with “traditional values” have become the most vociferous force against “traditional” public education. And on the other side, those supposedly enamored of the mutual obligations of the social contract are increasingly charmed by emulations of elitism. This strange, convoluted merger has inconceivably alloyed to denounce the public education system which was once the boast and crown jewel of the American Republic.

   So, since Charters aren’t delivering over-all better educational results, and government can “at will” integrate and utilize the same advantages and corrections of structure permissible to Charters in traditional public schools, why is there this growing and expensive trend to build and operate two distinct “public” school systems? There are two principle reasons. The first allows Charter schools to attend to the primary function of schools – education. Government had mistakenly comingled schools and social services provision instead of erecting separate infrastructures to address distinctive competencies and missions. And secondly, and most insidiously, to kill off one branch where there is strong unionization. The “inverted totalitarianism” of the Corporatocracy, which has openly displaced government as the arbiter of the social interests, has the goal of an union-less society; and among the few remaining obstacles to capital’s complete subjugation and silencing of labor, are the public service unions.

  

  I again point out that “Charters” as a category, almost as “non-union” as Walmart, by objective statistical measurements, haven’t overcome the metrics of non-success usually attributed to the evil impositions inherent in collective bargaining. But, the numbers are in, and they simply can’t blame the “union”. Nonetheless, plank-holders of middle class wages and benefits, street-educated and organized to appreciate the value of the property of their labor, find their grand-children have submitted to the unrelenting subliminal message that neo-feudalism is the default, inevitable destiny of economic Darwinism, stipulated to by disinterested Nature, and supposedly independent of the selfish interests of the self-interested with fulsome purchased access to deciding government power.   

  

  I don’t want to tell anyone what to think, but it is important for our society to question “big” changes, whether it’s the transition from isolationism to empire, or a public educational system that is supposed to be about “choice” that can only be profitably accessed if “it” chooses you.  The implications for conceptions of equity are clear, and expenditures of public dollars should primarily be about calculable equity.

     

Is it Just Me?

    One of the essential requirements to translate from youth to functional American adulthood is the ability to intelligently accept hypocrisy. If this skill is not acquired you are doomed to spiritual and material failure.

    

    Firstly, you must not be deceived by that first instinct and assume that in “human” society humanity is prioritized. No, all the laws, social stratification and good opinion of mankind are based on the primacy of ‘property’. Your entitlement to the so-called “necessities of life” is directly proportional to the amount of property you possess. And the forms of property are “real”, “personal”, fiat money, and the labor of others. So, one of the first hypocrisies that must be thoroughly accepted in American society as suggested by the flowery language of our founding documents, is that “human rights” are superior to “property rights”. In actuality, “human rights” are only the dividend paid after property rights are secured by the agency of “democratic” government, and again, are by degree as “unalienable” as the appraisal of possession and amount of property endows them. This is why one can be employed by one of the largest and most prosperous corporations on earth and ‘labor’ (fundamentally a reversion to peasantry) will not return the most basic human right – a livelihood. And why others can commit self-aggrandizing un-punishable financial crimes!

   

    Secondly, it is the unquestioned obligation of our citizenship to internalize the fantasy of “American Exceptionalism” and cling to the belief that this culture engaged in “manifest destiny”, imperialism, and perpetual warfare since the first permanent immigrant settlements on this continent – is “peaceful”. This requires an intellectual gymnastic beyond mere hypocrisy. That being the case, it shouldn’t be necessary to review our American history replete with the various and sundry mendacities that have accompanied the imperialist agenda to illustrate willful dissimulation bordering on psychopathology. Instead we can turn to current events to reveal our cultural sanctimony.  

   

    Yesterday a national budget was proposed in which one-half of discretionary spending will be directed to the military. One-half! This at a time when tremendous personal wealth is being created and centralized, food for the hungry programs are being cut, and public schools are literally disappearing for lack of funding. Why, it may be asked, does the richest, most powerful, sole superpower even need to expend half of its discretionary spending, an amount slightly less than the combined military expenditures of all the nations on earth, for “defense”? If no nation or group of nations is spending even a fraction of what we’re spending to defend themselves from ‘us’, it would seem to follow they’re not spending huge amounts in order to attack us; which begs the question, what is our huge defense expenditure defending against? It cannot rightfully be called “defense” spending. It can only be “offense”, empire building spending. Yet in our bizarre cultural narrative, our empire is the historically unique outgrowth of “peace” – despite the in-progress torrent of flowing blood directly attributable to American military foreign adventures on-going in 139 countries that goes unexamined and unexplained by “peaceful”, secure  Americans.

   

    Is it any wonder then that today, Jan. 17, our President, a lawyer and constitutional scholar, can twist his mouth to tell us that “our friends and neighbors” in the NSA may be forgiven the abrogation of the Fourth Amendment, because “friends and neighbors” are not constitutionally constrained when confronting the consequences of our national decision to wage war against the world. After all, war is peace. And Americans are “free” notwithstanding any recision of supposedly protected, unalienable rights, and appearances to the contrary. To say otherwise would make the President a hypocrite.

   

Freedom R.I.P.

    The obituary to freedom has been written, yet Americans distracted by the effluvium of trivia offered by both mainstream and ‘social’ media are unaware that it has been written and typeset.

     

    Still another frightening example of Orwellian mischief conducted by the NSA has come to light. Their TAO (Tailored Access Operation) group does, among other devilish things, intercept computers ordered online and detours them to facilities where various malware and spyware are embedded at levels that undermine any encryption or other protective measures the eventual owner may choose to install, before being repackaged and delivered to the purchaser. It is my understanding that the spy embedded will record the very keystrokes used to install encryption commands – making the encryption an ineffectual locked door with a spare key held by the NSA. It has been reported that this program has been in effect since 1997, well before the increasingly suspect empire-incentive mysteries of 9/11 occurred.

     

    This preemptive attack on privacy, so intellectually similar to the atrocious criminal rationale of the Iraq invasion and the insane Vietnam reasoning of the necessity “to destroy villages in order to save them” cannot be justified as a measure to “preserve our freedom”. It is a direct, calculated assault upon that freedom with the ultimate purpose to surgically remove the communication or influence of individuals who may question the government’s policies, motives, or economic favoritism/classism and make it impossible for Government of the people, for the people, to be challenged by any formation of a disaffected critical mass that can be called “the people”.

     

    Following as it does the revelations and subsequent perjuries of NSA activity in the collection of ALL telephonic communication – a UNIVERSAL search seeking crime instead of “probable cause” warranting a search – and the new enunciation of the “patriotic” canard that journalism which exposes illegal and unconstitutional activities of government as “treason”, and the establishment of an additional standing army, Homeland Security, joined with the increasingly militarized local police combined as a force that can overwhelm any Second Amendment benefit the people are permitted to fantasize as protection against encroachment of government upon the rights the government deems inconvenient for the security and enlargement of the Empire, it would in days of yore inspire a ‘committee of correspondence’ –at least! But the exchange of private communication is too threatening to allow because all private thoughts must now be vetted for compliance with jungle-capitalism, jingoistic imperialism, and intellectually unfettered adoration of Israel.

    

     What is amazing and sad is that our highly educated representatives seem unaware that they were not elected to represent “government” or capital, but rather in the course of acting as “government” their primary responsibility is to represent “us” and assure our rights take primacy over the tempting conveniences and illusions of power.

     

    There can be no ‘legal’ justification for the excesses of the “secret state”, and since none are offered we may as well use the one remaining duty the “free press” elects to observe – and publicly print the obituary.

Obama's Generational Problem

I listened to the president’s Syria speech the other night where he attempted to convince the nation that we Americans are morally burdened with still another violent duty in the service of righteousness. The symptomatological cascade that Mr. Obama has succumbed to the pathology of imperial power, proffered by the permanent military-industrial bureaucracy, was confirmed by the encapsulation of his banal reasoning in a plethora of discreditable clichés glued together by the rhetorical excrement of empire – right down to the foolishness that some unique gift of “exceptionalism” justly enfranchises all the expedient, violent, and hypocritical activities this nation undertakes.

According to the unchanged opinions of the majority of Americans, even The Great Orator couldn’t re-legitimize our sham notion of “exceptionalism” which has been rendered intellectually and factually dubious to the ascending, culturally dominant generation geo-politically matured and edified by our brutal, blatant, and unapologetic Real politik fraud in Iraq. The demagoguery and rose-tinted lenses which for so long nullified the color of blood have been displaced by a new willingness to view impulsive militarism with the cynicism fitting to its nature and bequeaths to progressive, peaceful civilization. And that's a good thing!

Will There Be War?

Considering the continued murkiness of the facts and evidence, I don’t believe this nation should elect to war based primarily on a ‘prime time’ Presidential monologue. A serious and comprehensive national dialogue is required. If I were to ask the President some questions they would be -

1.    If violence is the answer to our grievance, why wouldn’t violence be the answer to someone else’s grievances a month from now or a year from now? Or is this war projected to be the war to end all grievances?

2.    If we bomb them, why shouldn’t we expect to be bombed? Americans have coasted too long on the anomaly of WWII and our recent conflicts where we engage in war and all the death and destruction happens “over there”. But war is not just us ‘doing them’; it is also them ‘doing us’. That’s war! And if bombs go off in their cities, we must expect they will go off in ours; exploded under the same construction of “justice” that supposedly informs our actions. Unless the President, in asking for authorization to go to war, is prepared to place this real possibility before the people, to make the people understand and appreciate the real consequences of war; that we must expect to see the blood of our children flowing down the storm drains in our streets, then his request would be less than his full moral duty. It would be an omission closely related to deception.

But there are other aspects equally pertinent to our national security and domestic tranquility to consider. We are not only debating a foreign war, we are debating a class war.

Over the course of the past weeks, right up to today, there haven’t been any other or new arguments presented differing from those generated on ‘day one’. No new evidence or proof has surfaced to sway adopted opinions. All of the originally held, various, and respective speculations are intact, in place, and unchanged. And the entire population is exposed to the same corporate media.  But I submit for consideration my admittedly unscientific conclusion derived from anecdotal evidence and my personal interpretation of the polls, that it appears that the economic top ten percent of the society is for the war, and the bottom 90% is against it. Why this is the case is another debate for another time. But “IF” I am correct I don’t believe it is possible for the President to lay out a case, lacking some as yet un-communicated, overwhelmingly compelling and believable arguments and proven facts that may have only emerged in the past hours, to change this calculus. So, although it is another discomfort in an uncomfortable and complex situation for a serially embattled president, a choice must be made. The President not only has a military decision to make, he has a political decision to make as well. His most vital and meaningful decision in this scenario doesn’t involve which weapons systems to employ, designating high value targets, or proving to the world how much of a badass he can be. What will have the greatest impact on our security and domestic tranquility is his decision on which constituency to appease. The historic and social trajectory of our nation awaits his choice.