ALL LIBERALS are messianic about education. David Brooks of The New York Times is no exception. His column today is about the need to restore the “vigorous virtues” in America. Instead of noting that the decline of virtue parallels the growth in Big Schooling, Brooks calls for more public spending on education. He even calls for “prenatal education,” which normally means health education for mothers but in this case I suspect Brooks means real prenatal education. Perhaps the differential between American and Japanese test scores could be eliminated by educating those in the womb. There is that eternal optimism. To a school fool, there’s nothing a school can’t do. Brooks writes:

Yet as great as the need is to streamline, reform and prune the state, that will not be enough to restore America’s vigorous virtues. This is where current Republican orthodoxy is necessary but insufficient. There are certain tasks ahead that cannot be addressed simply by getting government out of the way.

In the first place, there is the need to rebuild America’s human capital. The United States became the wealthiest nation on earth primarily because Americans were the best educated.

That advantage has entirely eroded over the past 30 years. It will take an active government to reverse this stagnation — from prenatal and early childhood education straight up through adult technical training and investments in scientific and other research. If government is “inconsequential” in this sphere, then continued American decline is inevitable.

                                   — Comments —

Lawrence Auster writes:

Brooks writes:

“In the first place, there is the need to rebuild America’s human capital. The United States became the wealthiest nation on earth primarily because Americans were the best educated.”

Brooks thinks that the intelligence and overall human quality of the country’s population is key to its flourishing. Of course, he supports and has never said a word against the mass immigration of non-white Hispanics and other low IQ groups that is steadily reducing the average IQ of the American population. Does he really think that a country with an average IQ veering toward 90 will do as well as a country with an average IQ of 100?

If I had any respect for the man, I would write to him about this. But I don’t, so I won’t.

Please follow and like us: