Public Schools: State sponsored child abuse!

Public education is state sponsored child abuse. There I said it.

Now for confession time, I was a public school teacher for ten years. That’s right! I participated in this evil, vile system designed to destroy the innate curiosity of children and force them into boxes that result in a compliant populous.

Some of you are sitting there saying, “Lystoy you are right about politicians, you are right about double standards, you are probably even right about the pay-gap. But man you have lost it here. Schools suck, but state sponsored child abuse? C’mon, buy a clue.”

Okay, I suppose it all depends on how you classify child abuse.

  • Would forcing a child to sit still for hours on end be classified as child abuse?
  • How about forcing students to take highly structured tests that last hours each day for ten consecutive days?
  • How about locking them inside and only allowing them to play for 20 minutes in 6 hours?
  • How about punishing them for age appropriate behavior?
  • How about teaching them the party line and disallowing independent thought?

But instead of just the general problems, let’s look at one specific area. Schools are designed to treat boys as if they are dysfunctional girls. When they do not behave they are diagnosed with a series of ailments.


Boys are 2 to 3 times more likely to be dyslexic than girls. The educational profession tried to argue otherwise but that pesky thing called data got in the way.

Boys are more prone to autism: 1 in 42 boys are diagnosed whereas 1 in 189 girls suffer from the learning disability.

Boys are three times more likely to be diagnosed with ADHD than girls.

Boys are more likely to be diagnosed as learning disabled.

Boys comprise 80% of the students diagnosed as emotionally disturbed.

Boys are 2.5 times more likely to be suspended from school.

Understand that all these problems are the basis of a very disturbing trend. When boys “cannot behave” in schools we diagnose and medicate them. We do not create environments where they can thrive. I would argue that girls are not thriving either, but are more adaptable to the “nature” of school.

My question has always been, why do we sort children by manufacture date, place them in environments that teach to the lowest common denominator, make them sit still inside an enclosed room, and then are shocked when they rebel against this insanity?

Part of the reason is that the roots of American public education are socialist. The purpose of public schools is to teach children to conform to society’s rules, to help them understand their “place” in that society, and to ensure they fit in. Any child who bucks the trend and stands out is medicated into compliance.

I will continue speaking about public education in the next few weeks, but in the interim, if there are any questions, comments, or you want to tell me how wrong I am, please do below.

In the meantime, for further information I suggest you check out Murray Rothbard’s book “Education: Free & Compulsory” below:

Leave a Reply