Posted by Tina
Frank Miele at the Daily Inter Lake in the Kalispell area of Montana has been looking back through old newspapers as a means of investigating historical political thought as it pertains to the decline of our country. His articles can be quite illuminating. Today he looks at progressivism’s mark on education in America:
I first became aware of Hoiles (Freedom Newspapers owner R.C. Hoiles) last year when researching information about the influence of progressivism on our public education system. Hoiles was one of the strongest voices against educator John Dewey and progressivism, and I quoted an editorial in one of Hoiles’ newspapers that called Deweyism “The Great Delusion.” As noted by the editorial writer, possibly Hoiles himself, “Progressive education is producing students who can’t think and who can’t read, write, spell, or figure with facility.”
Even more significant was the conclusion of the editorial writer that, “Under the present system children are taught that competition is not good, only to find out when they become adults that they are in a competitive world. No sooner do they discover this vital point than they become easy marks for those who feel that the competitive, free enterprise system is bad and that competition should be eliminated by the force of the government. It is only natural that the children brought up in this sort of environment will look upon the competitive system with a jaundiced eye and turn to the government for the solution of their problems.”
In 1953, when this was written, maybe the jury was out. But now that we have lived through the conversion of our mid-20th-century manufacturing-based economy to the 21st-century welfare-based economy, there is a guilty verdict hanging over the head of progressivism for anyone to see.
Unfortunately, the “jaundiced eye” predicted by Hoiles or his surrogate has grown so diseased that at least half the population of the United States no longer has eyes to see. (continues)
If you care about our American heritage, education, and preserving this nation you will want to read Meile often.
Tell me Tina? Who’s gonna compete for you labor if you work for the company … in a company town? The company don’t pay you enough to leave. Hell, the company don’t pay you enough to eat. What are you gonna do?
You and Frank are just being quite willfully blind about how we got where we are.
How old are you Libby? You sound like a ninety-five year old bitching about the old days. What a hoot. I will point out that in many university towns a similar condition exists because they get hold of city councils, kill the entrepreneurial spirit, tax and regulate in a truly silly fashion, and drive businesses out of town. Not quite a company town by the strict definition but certainly a controlling entity (with inflated salaries on the peoples dime) killing the golden goose.
Company towns of the type you are speaking were pretty much done by 1920 because ordinary Americans began to accumulate wealth and couldn’t be controlled. A lot of them invested in their own business. Old man Ford had a philosophy that would replace the company town mentality…he wanted his employees to be able to afford his automobile! He had to compensate them well to accomplish that goal. The Coors company had the same philosophy.
People in this country have always valued freedom and the opportunity it affords them to be their own bosses and build their own dreams. As new businesses grow opportunity for others grow too. Freedom is what has made everything in America possible. Company men were done in by the true progress that freedom begets naturally. And the original unions that helped destroy the company man mentality did what most movements, especially if they forget what allowed their success. Theyunion became the thing it hated, controlling and dictatorial. That is the underlying reason they are on the wane now.
Now we have to deal with the monopoly called biggovernmentparty that seeks to dictate all business from the White House and the Halls of Congress and confiscate all profits for its own use and power. NO THANK YOU!
I’m afraid it is you who fails to understand the very basics of America and American success. You have a crappy, negative attitude that denies what is right in front of your face. The last three years have been a motion picture quality living color lesson in the failure of what you espouse and a complete refutation of your beliefs.
Without the wealth building efforts of ordinary and extraordinary Americans there is no money to redistribute to any purpose or project…roads, bridges, education, food stamps, welfare, military. It all comes from the efforts of individuals who risked and built business.
Right now too many of us are riding in the redistribution cart of the biggovernmentparty union (or collective). Keep pushing and dissing and taking and it will all fall down. Shared poverty is not the American dream.
Libby you are too bright to not be able to see this very simple truth. Is it pride? Pride’s a killer.
If you want education for our kids, better roads, fewer people on food stamps and welfare, stronger middle class then you had better pull your head out and help to creat the maximum conditions for the entrepreneurial/investment spirit to take hold in America. You better rethink that stinky attitude about the people who work hard long hours, risking their own money, to bring a product or service to market. We need a lot of these people and we need them soon or there will be no money…and no jobs…and there will be more hurt…a whole lot more hurt.
Freedom loving Americans wishing to read another excellent essay on the subject of freedom, enterprise, the roll of government in our society and the dynamic that springs from our freedoms should read Paul Ryan at the American Spectator today. It’s a keeper; I’ll give you a taste:
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/07/24/after-roanoke
Can I get a right on!
“You sound like a ninety-five year old bitching about the old days.”
Frank was being historical, was he not? Trying to trace the origins of progressive politics/education? Touting the virtues of “competition” when it is perfectly plain, historically speaking, that progressive politics arose from, shall we say, a competitive imbalance.
And I don’t know what ya’ll are grousing about anyway. Competition, as a motivator in human affairs, is not gone from our society … just mitigated a bit.
Which is to say, the powerful don’t get to ride herd, unmitigated, over the powerless.
How you can complain about this … is beyond me.