Are You Creating an Unequal Playing Field by Helping Your Children Succeed?

We have neither the time or the inclination to follow every dim-witted academic down his or her rabbit hole, but this guy needs an award.  The Cluebat Acedemic Award.

Do you read to your kids?  Drive them to sports or recreational activities?  Introduce them to new experiences?

Professor Adam Smith by way of Semi-Partisan Politics:

‘What we realised we needed was a way of thinking about what it was we wanted to allow parents to do for their children, and what it was that we didn’t need to allow parents to do for their children, if allowing those activities would create unfairnesses for other people’s children’.

The test they devised was based on what they term ‘familial relationship goods’; those unique and identifiable things that arise within the family unit and contribute to the flourishing of family members.

For Swift, there’s one particular choice that fails the test.

‘Private schooling cannot be justified by appeal to these familial relationship goods,’ he says. ‘It’s just not the case that in order for a family to realise these intimate, loving, authoritative, affectionate, love-based relationships you need to be able to send your child to an elite private school.’

I suspect that Smith wants all parenting to be inferior, so that all children have an equal opportunity at mediocrity.

Now, the good news is that he is in Australia, which is far enough away from the U.S. to give American’s a sense of safety.  The bad news is, his ideas – if they can be called that – might spread here.




This entry was posted in Education, Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Are You Creating an Unequal Playing Field by Helping Your Children Succeed?

  1. Kyle Kiernan says:

    I’m always amazed at how fast they go for the word “allow”.
    Cretins with no power always reaching to control everyone.

    Liked by 3 people

  2. Grace says:

    “Now, the good news is that he is in Australia, which is far enough away from the U.S. to give American’s a sense of safety. The bad news is, his ideas – if they can be called that – might spread here.”


    Ship. Sailed.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. Dianna says:

    In reply to the title:

    I sure hope so!


  4. onwyrdsdream says:

    I seem to recall that there were people rambling about how it was unfair that some parents read to their children and what not. It was unfair, because those children had some advantage that lower class children didn’t, which became benefits that lasted a lifetime. But rather than coming to the conclusion, hey, maybe lower class parents should read to their children too, they thought it was better to prevent upper class parents from conferring to their children any advantage. An idea only someone who’d been soaking in socialist thought for a decade could come up with or speak without shame. I can’t remember if it was a socialist-ology professor, someone from Occupy or a BLM irritant, but those ideas are already here. That said, they’re also stupid enough that few if any accept them as rational. But, not long ago, that was also true of bearded Y gened dudes in mascara being in the woman’s room. And now it’s become a public debate.


    • omegapaladin says:

      Implicit in this is the idea that lower class parents cannot improve their child-rearing practices. It’s incredibly bigoted.


      • onwyrdsdream says:

        Well, there is that, but it is also somewhat fueled by a spirit of rejecting values and tradition. The 3 olds all look like work, after all. Surely you’ve read people squawking about the rejection of … long string of words meant pejoratively (white male cis-gendered etc etc) which translate to “western” values. That coming in on time, hard work, etc were white values. White, because its easy for them to anger their fellow travelers over “white.” White to them is even a class. For the BLM mindset, the very fact that white parents read to their children (mine did to me even as they lived on a single income, without a college education, near or below the poverty line for many years) means that they should NOT do so.

        Generally, copying success is thought of as being a good life strategy, but rather they want to look at what successful people do and do entirely different things. Like just because someone they hate does X that X is somehow innately bad. (Hitler was a vegetarian, thus vegetarians are evil is the logic) Ideally while still getting their wants and needs filled. That this leads to multi-generational poverty is inevitable, but rather than change, everything is blamed but the root behaviors. That most of those successful strategies have come to be associated with conservatives and capitalism only makes them more dissatisfied. Once you’ve rejected something and not suffered for it your brain will reinforce that that was the right choice. Likewise if you accept something and don’t suffer. Brains are the sorts of things which associate immediately because of survival needs of our ancestors, even about things which are irrelevant. Because of compassion, we try hard to make sure people don’t suffer terribly their poor choices. That in itself is a poor choice.

        So it isn’t only that those who think themselves elite and believe that the downtrodden they can feel better about themselves by helping with other people’s money believe those same people cannot be expected to read to their children, but that those same downtrodden themselves believe they should reject hard work, showing up on time, family values, because people they dislike embrace those things. With stomachs not empty, a roof over their heads, and cable TV dulling their minds, getting any more than what they already have would require immense work, often with innumerable regulatory hurdles both positive and negative compelling them not to try harder. They can’t even see what they could have that is all that much greater than what they already have. It is pretty hard to imagine something significantly greater than NOW for most people.

        Though it will eventually right itself. Somewhere. After the nearly inevitable collapse.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s