This article was printed from KeepAndBearArms.com.
For more gun- and freedom-related information, visit
http://www.KeepAndBearArms.com.
----------------------------------------------------------------
|
TAKE THE
OFFENSIVE, Part X How to weaken & destroy
the main source of anti- freedom & anti-self-defense funding, improve public
education, and stop government indoctrination centers. By Russ Howard The following is a paraphrased NRA Alert: "The National Education
Association, America's largest teachers' union, has long been a shrill proponent
of restrictions on our right to keep & bear arms. On July 3rd 2000, NEA
launched a petition drive for gun owner licensing, registration, waiting
periods, 'ballistic fingerprinting', & mandatory storage. No mention of
targeting violent criminals or enforcing existing gun controls. The attack on
law-abiding gun owners, mirroring Gore's platform, was not met with complete
approval at NEA's convention. One teacher said, 'Rather than gun control, we
need parental control & responsibility.' Another said, 'metal detectors are
more useful than gun control to protect schools...[Let's] control TV shows,
video games & movies that promote violence.' NRA will watch any attempts to
use public schools for a political agenda. To oppose NEA's petition, call 202…,
write to…, or email NEA's President at..." No wonder we're losing. Would President Reagan have insulted your intelligence by asking you to get
on your knees, write Comrade Breshnev a letter, and whine about the Soviet
invasion of Afghanistan? Might as well light candles, hold hands, and sing Kumbayah. Pleading with
sworn enemies of freedom and decency does nothing but squander our time, energy
& money, and it demoralizes us on top of it all. There are countless things we can do that are far more effective and
satisfying. Teach someone how to shoot, for example, or write a letter to a
newspaper. But much of what we do is intrinsically defensive. Defense is
essential, but the problem with always being on the defensive is that by &
large the best we can do is not lose more than we already have. Taking turf, new
or old, is out of the question. Unless you're on the offensive as well, sooner
or later you'll lose more turf and never get it back. To utilize our true potential as a movement, we must be flexible. Question
the "rules" of the game. Engage in unconventional political warfare,
step outside the paradigm of our struggle and redesign it to our advantage,
search for weak points, for opportunities to make the enemies of freedom pay for
attacking our rights. Teach them, through pain, that it's not worth it. Often
most effective, while not neglecting the defense of your own primary issue, is
to find & exploit other issues that serve as the enemy's Achilles' Heel, to
weaken him financially and destroy him politically, at the very least keep him
so busy defending himself that he can no longer attack your rights. There are struggles we should be part of that will have profound,
long-lasting benefits for the cause of liberty, that are not directly gun rights
issues. Educational choice is one. FIRST: IDENTIFY & FACE THE PROBLEM Government school unions have long been one of America's foremost enemies not
only of constitutional liberty and decent values; but of decent-quality public
education itself. SCHOOL CHOICE & VOUCHERS Various educational choice plans have been proposed in the past 40 years to
improve public education. The debate has primarily centered on vouchers, which
would take some of the per-student money now spent at government schools and let
parents spend it at the school of their choice. Private & home schooling
would expand, kids would get better educations, and the worst G- schools would
have to compete, shrink, or disappear. The better G-schools need not fret.
Parents happy with their schools can leave their kids where they are. Other educational plans have been proposed, including innovative concepts
where parents would actually be paid bonuses based on standardized tests of
their kids' performance. From here on I use the terms "school choice"
and "vouchers" loosely to describe any plan that lets parents direct
public education dollars to the school of their choice government, private, or
religious or that rewards parents based on the educational progress of their
children. To see how school choice harnesses the power of competition and free
enterprise to improve education, consider this analogy to the current government
system: Suppose the government taxed everyone heavily to support a government-owned
car manufacturer, and gave everyone a new car every so often. None of the
workers could be fired, their pay depended solely on seniority, and so
performance-based pay was strictly forbidden. If you didn't like the quality or
style of your "free", one-size-fits-all G-car, you couldn't just take
your money to another car company like you can now, because they'd already have
your money. Few but the wealthy would cough up another $20,000-$50,000 for a
"private car". So you lobby the government to improve quality and
offer the style you like (good luck!). The answer would always be some version
of "we need more money" (fewer cars built per autoworker, higher pay,
nicer factories & buildings, etc.). Every decrease in quality would be
hailed as evidence that we need to put more money into the government's car
manufacturing monopoly. Imagine what cars would be like. Naturally, the G-school unions adamantly oppose vouchers, accurately
perceiving them as a threat to their reign of terror. The teachers unions
prevent you from spending your kid's share of public education money at the
school of your choice. They're your employees, but they say you can't be trusted
to choose a good school. Meanwhile, in Los Angeles, 4 out of 10 G-school
teachers send their kids to private schools. The unions spent 16+ million
dollars against California's 1993 school choice initiative, outspending
proponents by an order of magnitude. They killed it with ease at a time when few
citizens understood the concept. But times have changed. Polls show increased
support, and new initiatives will cost far more to kill. THE OFFENSIVE It's time for the self-defense civil rights movement to support school choice
and tuition vouchers: ANOTHER ACHILLES' HEEL: MISUSE OF UNION DUES Employees have options to prevent all or part of mandatory union dues from
being used to destroy constitutional liberty: Thus, you not only keep up to nearly $1000 a year from being used to destroy
America, you can redirect it to help save America, at no cost to you. Consult an attorney first. http://www.pacificjustice.org/union.html
has information on these options. Neither the union nor the employer should
grill you about the nature of your religious objection, or give one religion
preference over another, but they might, so unless you belong to a church with a
"recognized" exception to dues (e.g., 7th Day Adventist), it may be
better to refuse to get specific about the nature of your personal spiritual
objection. The Pacific Justice Institute will represent employees without charge
in matters regarding religious and academic freedom, and freedom of association. Years ago, a proposal by Arnold Gaunt and myself to bleed anti- freedom
warchests by educating NRA members on such issues was rejected as "not a
gun issue". But school choice is a gun rights issue. The enemies of freedom and gun
rights get hundreds of millions in support from g-school unions & employees,
whose 2nd-rate government reeducation monopoly turns millions of kids a year
against their own heritage of liberty, destroys civilized values, and
perpetuates poverty, crime, and violence. Vouchers will end that system. Some will refuse to forward an alert like this because it's not directly a
gun issue, or they prefer tax credits to vouchers, or they want to totally end
taxpayer support of education, or some other reason that boils down to "I
oppose any program that doesn't achieve my perfect solution in one fell
swoop", even though their plan has zero chance of significant voter
acceptance in our grandchildren's lifetimes. In 10 years, when the NEA/Dems/HCI/etc.
are stronger than ever and we're going British by the day, do you want to look
back and wish you'd spread the word? The teachers unions won't have any such
regrets: National anti-gun petitions are hardly an education issue, yet the NEA
is doing one, and all kinds of other anti-gun stuff. Why? Because they know
that's their enemy's Achilles' heel, and they understand political warfare. Unfortunately, the enemies of freedom don't tie their hands behind their
backs and play by witless rules. Otherwise, the G- school unions wouldn't be
pushing gun control, would they? Be forewarned: G-school unions may be on an ingenious offensive of their own:
Using infiltrators to promote the notion that vouchers will do great harm by
unavoidably bringing regulation to private schools. Sound paranoid? Maybe. But
G- school unions spend hundreds of millions a year promoting statism, fighting
vouchers, etc. It shouldn't surprise us to find out NEA spends a million or so a
year hiring folks to peddle that line, or that some G-school types figure it out
and do it on their own. Since this article was first published some months ago,
I've heard from G-school teachers and the spouse of a G-school administrator,
who were spreading such notions. I hardly think everyone who echoes that line is
an infiltrator, but I suspect that many have been duped by them. The notion lacks perspective. A primary goal of school choice is to reduce or
eliminate government control. That's why California's current initiative gives
private schools strong new constitutional protections against government
meddling, and, of course, no private school is required to accept vouchers.
Moreover, the more parents with kids in private school, the more voters with a
direct interest in protecting private schools from government meddling. To the
minimal extent such meddling occurs, parents will tend to patronize the schools
that tolerate it least, as those will be the better schools. Currently, perhaps 95% of students attend G-schools, while vouchers would
result in a large number of new private schools. So even if some regulation were
to slip through, the argument against vouchers boils down to this: Some
government regulation of new private schools is worse than government ownership
of nearly all schools. For boning up on educational choice, KABA has a short Q&A/FAQ I prepared
for California's 1993 school choice initiative. The figures are dated, but the
concepts are valid. Go to: http://www.KeepAndBearArms.com/Howard
and look for the Voucher FAQ. © 2000 Russ Howard. Republish for non-commercial use only. |
||||||||