John Stuart Mill

[u/FacetiousOwl]

The problems inherent in state-run education have become increasingly clear as the political right and left wage an ongoing battle for control over what schools teach. Mill’s warning remains relevant: when education is centralized under the state, political factions have an incentive to capture that authority and use it to impose their own values and beliefs.

At the same time, education is enormously important to a free and functioning society, and ensuring broad access to it serves an important public purpose. The difficult question from a classical liberal perspective is therefore not simply whether the state should be involved in education, but how education can be structured so that it remains broadly accessible without giving whichever political faction controls the government the power to dictate intellectual conformity. That is a much more difficult problem to solve.

[u/lemon_lime_light]

Mill’s warning remains relevant: when education is centralized under the state, political factions have an incentive to capture that authority and use it to impose their own values and beliefs.

That's a great warning to keep and mind. Very relatedly, I'd also add that centralization can really squash the dynamism and experimentation required for institutions (such as schools) to develop into their best versions.

And as far as "the difficult question...", what about charter schools? They promote choice and innovation through market principles and I suspect they're structured in a more decentralized way (must follow some state mandates but are smaller and maybe part of a more voluntary-type of association of similar schools).

[u/Pgaccount]

As a non American, I think this is way more of an issue with how centralised and rigid the system is more than who's running it.

In the Alberta school system you're allowed to go to any school in your board, and you can also get a waiver to go another if you can show a need (my kids need this because we live in a bit of a weird zone where one ends and another begins) LA actually did this 15 years ago and found similar benefits to the voucher system.

Canada in general is still very shaped by a monarch system, so the idea of a state run body free from political interference ("crown corporation" is the term we use) is pretty normal. You simply have an appointment process that considers the best candidate from the perspective of secular education. Our schools have locally elected trustees who (despite dumpster Dani's attempts) by law have no political affiliation so it's hard for them to be leaned in by party factions and keeps elections relatively focused on local issues.

My biggest argument against the abolition of public education (and my argument for public pre-education) is twofold. The easiest argument is that the ROI is well established, having kids in structured environments with social interaction and meaningful lesson plans earlier produces better socio-economic outcomes down the line. The other, but more abstract argument is that it gives an independent look at children without parents present, which I think it's an essential right of children to be checked up on. Recently Alberta made homeschooling a right of parents at the behest of fundamentalist religious lobbies. One of the "schools" operated by a Mennonite community in northern Alberta was recently found to be beating kids with a fan belt with parental approval which I think we can all agree is a clear violation of the child's rights.