IP: Re: What Does "Nail the Bastards" Teach Children?

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

I am far from sure this is a contrary view. Both have right parts and wrong 
parts. Someone should blend them into good advice djf


> User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.2509
> Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2001 11:38:53 -0500
> Subject: Re: IP: What Does "Nail the Bastards" Teach Children?
> From: Virginia Postrel <vpostrel () dynamist com>
> To: Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>
>
> A contrary view, from Lisa Snell, the director of the Reason Public Policy
> Institute's education and child welfare program
> (http://www.rppi.org/edchild/index.html) and the mother of two little kids.
> I published this on my site (alias vpostrel.com) and it's now at
> http://www.dynamist.com/scene/915.html#lisa
> Virginia
>
>
> I have a three year old and a five year old and I want them to feel safe.
> Having said that, the media coverage of the impact of the terrorist attacks
> on America's children is sickeningly trite and leaves one with the
> impression that our school children are extremely coddled. I have been
> following Education Week's coverage of the terrorist attack "Terror Touches
> Schools," which has collected newspaper stories about terrorism and children
> from around the nation.  Every major newspaper in the country has run a
> story on how teachers should respond to children. From the NEA's "Crisis
> Communication Guide and Toolkit" to the cadre of child-development
> specialist and grief counselors being called to service at elementary and
> high schools--the consensus seems to be that "eggshell stepping is best."
> School children should be protected and reassured that they are safe. The
> best advice is to turn the television off and try to return to a sense of
> normalcy. However, the realities of early dismissals, television bans, and
> the strange behavior of their parents and teachers make it perfectly clear
> to children that the adults do not feel safe. Security above all else is the
> most important theme perpetuated in our schools.
>
> Perhaps schools have been protecting kids for too long. The obsession with
> childhood grief counselors may make some long for the days of climbing under
> their desk for a duck and cover drill.
>
> My mother-in-law called from Baltimore before 7:00 AM [Pacific] to tell us
> to turn on our television. My five year old saw the live coverage of the
> second plane crashing into the WTC. He immediately went and found his
> Spiderman t-shirt and told me that he and Gavin would not be at school when
> I picked them up because they were going with the Power Rangers to save the
> world. He urgently wanted to get to school to call a meeting with Gavin and
> Tanner, his five-year-old compadres, to decide what to do--a typical
> reaction from a boy who lives and breathes bad guys versus good guys. People
> are always talking about how bad television is for children and they seldom
> talk about how bad their schools are for children. Yet, I would rather be on
> a highjacked airplane with someone inoculated by Power Rangers than someone
> who believes the message of every school institution: that weapons
> are bad and that the authorities and the government will solve all problems
> and protect you.
>
> Public institutions want children to believe that good guys never use
> weapons to defend themselves. At my son's "private" school five-year old
> boys are not allowed to play Power Rangers or Spiderman. Even talking about
> superheroes is grounds for a "Time Out."  In other respects, the private
> school is a good one--but I have yet to find any other public or private
> school that is nuanced in any way about guns and violence. The message to
> children is that all weapons are always bad and that public institutions
> (like schools) have to protect ordinary citizens from violence. The message
> is that if people are nicer and more tolerant--if kids learn to respect all
> cultures, then these bad violent things will not happen.
>
> There were also stories in Education Week's coverage about "lessons"
> schoolchildren could learn from the tragedy. Reported lessons include
> geography, lessons about letter writing, and lessons about making civic
> contributions to our nation.
>
> Sadly, I have yet to see any newspaper or school specialist call for lessons
> about liberty, about constitutional guarantees, about how these terrorist
> acts will test fundamental values of freedom versus safety. Schools will not
> ask schoolchildren to think about how it came to be that only the terrorists
> had weapons while flight crews, pilots, and ordinary citizens did not.
>
> In fact, schools rarely engage students to think about issues of liberty--it
> is never part of the curriculum.  Perhaps that is why so many national
> leaders and ordinary citizens (with many exceptions) are so quick to concede
> that we have to give up many of our prior conveniences, in the name of
> security. That message is really no different than the standard message we
> have been taught in school.
>
> The fact that public and private schools have no appreciation for liberty
> and freedom and that these themes never are discussed in the classroom is
> one of the most important arguments for parental choice and control of a
> child's education. It is no wonder that homeschooling is so popular within
> our community.
>
> --
> Virginia Postrel (vpostrel () dynamist com)
> Editor-at-large, Reason magazine
> Author, The Future and Its Enemies
> "Economic Scene" columnist, The New York Times
> Contributing editor, D Magazine
> http://www.dynamist.com | http://www.reason.com
> (214) 219-5725 | (214) 219-1188 (fax)
> --
> Read my commentary on The Scene http://www.dynamist.com/scene.html



For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/