Schools

Hillary Clinton Wants Benevolent Bureaucrats to Bring More 'Structure' to Poor Kids' Lives

The candidate calls for longer school days and school years.

|

Here's Hillary Clinton at last night's Democratic "town hall" in South Carolina, answering a question about whether the school year should be longer:

"While we're at it, let's make sure those schools are all stocked with this book."
Balzer + Bray

There's a lot of research which shows that, for most middle-class or well-off kids, they get out of school in the spring or early summer…and then they do things over the summer that keep them learning. A lot of disadvantaged kids get out and they actually lose some of the learning that they've gained during the year. So I want very much to expand the school day and the school year, and provide more structure. Starting with kids who would be most benefited from it, but I am in favor of states looking at how they might do that for every student.

It sounds like an old argument for the allegedly uplifting effects of imperialism, though in this case she's calling not for colonizing territory but for colonizing time. In Clinton's worldview, what the disadvantaged need is to have "structure" imposed on them, and the way to impose that structure is to compel them to spend more time in institutions. (Notice that she isn't arguing here for, say, offering after-school or summer programs for families who want them. To "expand the school day and the school year" is to expand the hours and days that kids are coerced to be in school.)

By the way: How did we get from kids forgetting facts over the summer to calling for longer school days? Are they losing their learning overnight too?

For more on the War on Summer Vacation, go here.

NEXT: How Scalia's Absence Could Protect the Exclusionary Rule

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. White man’s woman’s burden.

  2. So I want very much to expand the school day and the school year, and provide more structure.

    Of course she does. She’d like nothing less than Plato’s ideal educational environment with no parental or other outside interference.

    1. “All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.”

    2. She’d like nothing less than Plato’s ideal educational environment with no parental or other outside interference.

      Nonsense.
      It is the position of the Departments that all early childhood programs and schools recognize families as equal partners in improving children’s development, learning and wellness across all settings, and over the course of their children’s developmental and educational experiences.

      See there? EQUAL PARTNERS, dumbass. Well, equal partners to start with, anyway. A liitle bit today, a little bit more tomorrow, a little bit more the day after that. But it’s NOT a slippery slope.

      1. Equal partners? They make it sound so dystopian, like I don’t have a choi…oh. I see.

      2. It’s sooo nice of them to let parents take an equal part in their children’s indoctrination education. Of course, the parents must capitulate to support the program through their local Parent Teacher Student organization with all the money, time, and talent required requested of them.

  3. Why not follow the lead of better school systems and have trimesters with three shorter breaks periods. That would keep the same number of days, but cut down on the amount of time a child is out of school at one time, reducing the tendency to forget.

    1. I have a friend who is a public school teacher who advocates this very thing. (Although his reason is that he just doesn’t like being idle for three months at a time.)

    2. Why not follow the lead of better school systems

      The German school day is shorter than the American. I dunno how they measure up to us but they seem to be doing OK.

  4. Having summer programs for parents that can’t afford a baby sitter and don’t want to leave their kid to whatever they can get up to, isn’t a bad idea. We already own the buildings, so why not use them year round.

    Going from that to we must force poor parents to keep them in schools year round because they can’t be trusted with their kids free time is just normal nanny state overreach.

    1. Having summer programs for parents that can’t afford a baby sitter and don’t want to leave their kid to whatever they can get up to, isn’t a bad idea. We already own the buildings, so why not use them year round.

      Fine, let people use the building but they can pay for their own fucking baby sitter

      1. Honestly, I think it should be part of teacher’s jobs. They get paid a years worth of salary, it should be expected they do a years worth of work.

        1. They get paid a years worth of salary

          Teachers are never paid enough for what they do. Ask one

          1. I think homework is bullshit, so I would be willing to let teachers avoid having to grade all of those 1+1 homework assignments in exchange for working year round. Think they would go for it?

        2. They get paid a years worth of salary, it should be expected they do a years worth of work.

          They do not get paid a year’s worth of salary for 9 months of work. They are offered 9 months of full pay or 12 months of reduced pay. Most take the latter, because it makes budgeting easier. And many teachers do work summer school to make some extra money.

          Just because school is, in some ways, glorified daycare, does not mean we should push for it become daycare in all but name.

    2. Having summer programs for parents that can’t afford a baby sitter and don’t want to leave their kid to whatever they can get up to, isn’t a bad idea. We already own the buildings, so why not use them year round.

      If she is worried about the “disadvantaged” kids, then let them go year round with summer programs. This gets them the remedial help they need, the middle-class & above kids get to go on break, and the teachers are gainfully employed year round.

      Win for everyone.

      1. We can’t have that. It’s part of the class struggle for the kids of the bourgeoisie to go to summer camp while kids of the proletariat go to remedial training. Every child must suffer equally.

  5. If I were running a school the classes would be set up on a quarter system, and I would give students (and teachers) the choice of which, if any, quarter to take off during the year. That way parents and kids could decide what time of the year works best for them to go off and do other things.

  6. This is not a winning argument against Clinton’s ideas. Most of the people who are all for this use school as free daycare. When the local school district went to a “year-round” schedule a decade or so, many horrible people were crushed to discover that the kids were getting a more distributed schedule to shorten summer break and not going to a 250 day in-class school year.

  7. This is a great piece about how taking offense has become a form of capricious consumption.

    http://www.washingtonexaminer……Dk.twitter

    When you see things like Hillary wanting to structure the lives of poor people, you realize that racial supremacy has been replaced with what I call virtue supremacy. People for whatever reason have an impulse to assert some kind of supremacy over others. It used to be that that impulse was satisfied through racial supremacy. White people woke up every day knowing that by being white they were superior to brown people. Black people woke up and knew they were superior to those with darker skin. Italians knew they were superior to Sicilians and so forth. Most of that has thankfully ended. It has been replaced, however, by something worse, virtue supremacy.
    .

    1. People feel superior because they are more virtuous than others and the virtue that most matters is “tolerance”. As bad as racial supremacy was, it was at least static. You couldn’t join other races and while it never got better, it didn’t get worse. Virtue supremacy, since the whole point is to get the lesser to join the virtuous, forever gets worse. Once everyone becomes “virtuous”, there is no way for the virtue supremacists to assert their supremacy so they have to invent a new virtue to do so and the process starts all over.

      This is why the culture wars never end and why things that were a few years ago considered the height or virtue are not enough to keep you from being branded unvirtuous. And why society has become so intolerant and manic about such trival things. The idiots on college campuses demanding “safe spaces” are nothing but virtue supremacists who have to resort to increasingly minute and insane things to assert their supremacy.

      I can’t see this ending well. Eventually there will be a revolt against this but the effect of that is likely to reject the concept of virtue at all. This will leave the ideas of tolerance and acceptance that ended the old regime of racial supremacy discredited and likely society will revert back to some nasty form of racial supremacy

      1. Your theory seems to fit well into the overarching theme of class struggle. The Hegelian/Marxian theory that history progresses through iterations of class struggle supports your helical virtue progression toward a grander and more just dystopian society.

        What’s not to like?

        1. I don’t think it explains all of history. But it does explain this. Marx and Heigel were wrong but they did tell a few truths.

    2. capricious consumption

      Amazing.

      1. Conspicuous. I was in a hurry okay. Can you at least read the post or try to? I thought that article was interesting and my idea of virtue supremacy worth considering. Yeah, I get it, it was a typo. It was funny like maybe the first 500 or so times the joke was made. But not every time.

        1. I don’t know, given the way that most of these “virtue supremacist” frenetically run from one disjointed issue to the next, capricious might actually make more sense than conspicuous.

          1. You are probably right.

        2. I wasn’t being sarcastic, I think it works

          1. Sorry. It kind of does but it was an accident. Honestly, I read the original headline as capricious.

            1. Your typos with the unconscious double meanings are great, and everyone agrees. They’re like easter eggs. Finding them adds to the fun of reading your post. (which I did read)

              1. Yes, he is right about the virtue supremacist theory but wrong about it not being funny every time.

                They don’t publish entire books full of malaprops for nothing.

                1. But we need a new word, “benapropism (?)” to describe a John typos that results in a new a better meaning.

            2. That didn’t even register as a typo.

    3. I need to put this all over my building…

  8. Teachers unions for this plan?

  9. Ceausescu soundly approves.

  10. Daycare centers and summer camps won’t allow this to happen without a fight.

  11. This is exactly the same thing as opposing school choice. None of this has anything to do with improving the lot of the poor! State run schools are doing, and deliberately doing, exactly what Loyola meant when he (allegedly) said “Give me a child for for his first seven years and I’ll give you the man” .

    The public schools, common core etc. are purely and simply about progressive indoctrination. Obviously you can indoctrinate best when you isolate the kid from outside influences.

    1. It is a jobs program for Democratic voters. Always follow the money.

      1. Much as I like following money, the money here is very much secondary. This is a big big part of why libertarians and classical liberal conservatives have been losing to the progressives. We let them take over the schools and the entertainment media.

        From birth kids are subject to intense indoctrination, the business man is always evil, white males are always evil, and on and on, always suppressing any notice of the good that western culture produced in favor of focusing on its flaws and failings. Meanwhile, back in the real world, it was western culture that finally recognized that slavery was wrong and ended it. It was western culture that eventually produced social and economic mobility. It was western culture that evolved into the enlightenment and the notiion of natural rights to life, liberty and property.

        1. It was the western culture that owned slaves for hundreds of years and caused millions to die from it, it was the western culture that engaged in genocide of anyone who stood in their way as they took land and resources for themselves, it was western culture that brought us Jim Crow and did everything in its power to stop civil rights, it was western culture that brought us Africans, and in some cases Native Americans, kept as exhibits in zoos, it is the western culture that brought prohibition and the drug war.

          Spare me your western culture enlightened bullshit. The ONLY place western culture matters is in the material spaces, which it is unrivaled. But other than that it sucks.

          /end rant

          1. EVERY culture owned slaves, some still do; Western culture eventually ended slavery. Every culture has done evil; western culture eventually recognized that it was evil and started to try to ameliorate that evil. Is western culture perfect? No. Show me who has done better.

            1. Sorry, the the “they did it too” argument is one I wouldn’t accept from a 5-year old. Yeah, you ended slavery, but fought like hell to keep it, and then morphed it into Jim Crow (not to mention the link that showed scenes from the 1950s) so color me unimpressed. I don’t have to prove another culture is better as you are the one that implied that western culture was superior. I am saying it is better in one area only – material. And quite frankly the material aspect is a small part of life.

              1. You seem to be missing something. Maybe it’s the ability to evaluate a culture or worldview outside of your own emotions.

                It is precisely those “material” improvements that made possible the ending of slavery in the western world. If you were knowledgeable about history you’d know that slavery had been a part of agriculture from the very beginning. It had to be. Slavery was the only way to scale agriculture. Technology made it possible to end slavery. There would be no end to slavery in large systems like agriculture without the technological improvements brought about by the very values that you reject. One more time for the slow to learn: slavery is a common aspect of agriculture up to the introduction of labor saving devices that made it (slavery) unproductive. Slavery would still be with us–and still exists in cultures lacking our labor-saving technologies–were it not for western culture and the advances in technology that it wrought.

                1. I will look past the condensation. I am more than capable of evaluating a culture and worldview “outside my emotions.” You say agriculture “required” slavery. At no time did it occur to the owners that they could pay people and get more production from them, as in every other economic venture? That is your argument? And which values do I reject: enslaving others, killing others to take their land and resources, treating people as objects and exhibits, destroying cultures that you don’t understand because you think yours superior; I admit it, I do reject those?

                  The values I place above all others are love of knowledge, sharing, respect for others, cooperation, respect for elders, love of children, hard work, avoidance of conflict, respect for nature, humor, family roles, humility, and a responsibility to my village. I don’t think these are horrible values, but others may.

                  1. Perhaps my “condensation” (condescension) was a bit over the top but I still believe that you have a simplistic view of history.

                    You wonder why slave owners did not merely pay their workers without the least bit of understanding that our current economy did not exist in these times. Taking slaves as tribute for winning a war was not only common, it was part of the ‘economy’. Working slaves was not much removed from working employees today. As a Native American I’d expect that you already know about the slavery among tribes in the Americas, long before–and continuing after–the introduction of Western Culture.

              2. Ivan. My advice is to go out in the world an really experience some non western cultures and then get back to us about how horrible you think western culture is.

                I will give you a hint; your college professors lied to you.

                1. John, I am an Inupiaq/Yupik, so I don’t have to go out into the world to see non western cultures. I work exclusively on Indian issues, so again I see it on a daily basis.

                  I’ll give you a hint, don’t ever assume to know another person and their background.

                  1. According to Wikipedia, there are less than 40,000 Yupik people between the US and Russia, and half as many Inupiaq. For a group that actually has some analogous characteristics, use the Sami people of Scandinavia.

                    Comparing a tribe, and a small one at that, to a billion or so people of various ethnicities and languages is nonsensical.

              3. Quite frankly the material aspect is a big part of life. Walk down a street in New Delhi where western culture didn’t fully take root and enjoy the smell.

                1. A friend just returned from Egypt. He said the place is filthy.

          2. The Jim Crow laws were part of the anti-western culture, progressive movement. It should come as no surprise that one of the most racist presidents we’ve had was none other than Woodrow Wilson, the epitome of the Top Man of progressive ideology. Since Progressivism is a modernized flavor of Socialism, and that Socialism is the anti-enlightenment strain of western culture, you are essentially blaming the chickens for the damage done by the fox. Yes, progressivism is a part of western culture, but it is an anti-western struggle against the very Scottish/American Enlightenment that gave us so much in the way of equality under the law, rule of law, and liberty for all.

            1. Hyperbolical ,

              Sorry, but you don’t get to off-load the parts of western culture you don’t like. Jim Crow was very much a part of that, as is the progressive movement as you yourself said it was the “anti-enlightenment strain of western culture.” Do I hold anyone alive today guilty for anything their ancestors did, no. But if you tell me how wonderful western culture was, I will push back and show the nasty side, which many people seem to gloss over as if it is nothing. The effects are still very much with us today.

              1. …if you tell me how wonderful western culture was, I will push back and show the nasty side…

                No. You didn’t “push back”. Instead, you started off with your Western Culture is BAD? pronouncement and then began to make your emotional appeal.

                1. If pointing out your history is an emotional appeal, then nothing else I can say to you. Have a good day.

              2. Who is offloading parts of western culture here? Western Culture originally limited recognition of rights to in group members. At Runymede the aristocracy secured recognition of their rights, and to some extent the rights of non aristocrat male property holders. In the American colonies recognition of those rights was expanded and extended to white males and to a limited extent towhite females. Later, gradually, admittedly slowly and with occasional regresses, those rights were extended to all.

                The thread of recognition of naturally occurring rights is the enlightenment, and the enlightenment is the heart of western culture. It is perfectly fair to point out that it is imperfect and excluded people from its benefits on flimsy bases for far too long. It is grossly unfair and foolish to denounce it as a culture without comparing it to the set of all other cultures.

          3. Western culture is presumably your culture. If we hadn’t become more enlightened, you wouldn’t even be able to recognize as evil those things you decry. Your very hatred of our past is evidence of our progress. But the next step is coming to peace with it.

          4. It was Western Culture that decided slavery was wrong WHILE THEY WERE THE SLAVERS. No one else had ever done that.

            It was Western Culture that decided that genocide was a crime. To everyone else, it was simply a side effect of conquest.

            I don’t think you grasp just how big an idea it was to stop oppressing people when you were the powerful one.

            THAT is what put Western Culture head and shoulders above all the rest.

            It was slaver culture fighting Western Culture that brought us Jim Crow. It was slaver culture that fought civil rights. The same culture that had lost the Civil War.

            The same culture that weaves it’s nasty tendrils around us still–in the guise of the ‘left’.

  12. With optimal precision this lump of wrinkled pink doo doo connected with exactly fucking no one.

  13. Want to know why so many of us yokeltarians on here know we can never align ourselves with the left?

    The comments here are a good place to start understanding why.

      1. You misspelled “predictable”.


    1. Matthew Orion Works at Pirate Party
      Morgan Gritley I was calling Margarita De La Vega “Rude” I think the Castros did a fine job freeing the people of Cuba & Latin America from the ravage’s of the capitalist pig dog oppressors who would have otherwise marginalized them & left them to fight drug cartels or something, What a nightmare that would’ve been.

      Viva!

      And just think: all they had to do to “free” them was kill all of the people that even thought of opposing them, their families, their friends, all of the gay people they could find, all of the mentally ill people they could find and anybody that owned a private business that they could find.

      Viva! My fucking ass.

      1. Hahaha that has to be a comic villain commie, not a real comment.

        Right?

    2. “Wherever there is a jackboot stomping on a human face there will be a well-heeled Western liberal to explain that the face does, after all, enjoy free health care and 100 percent literacy.”

      ? John Derbyshire

    3. Comments don’t appear for me so I pause Adblock and reload – page hangs. Oh well, I guess they didn’t want my clicks anyway.

  14. spanish is a tranny?

  15. If you let poor kids have summers off, they might work to gain skills and make money that didn’t come from the government.

  16. I remember as a kid making the argument that mandatory schooling was wrong. See, I was skipping classes, but managed to turn in work regardless and was still getting high grades. The school counselor said it had nothing to do with my performance and it wasn’t fair to the other students who were in no way impacted by my decision not to attend. So the schools solution to this grave problem was to kick me out and send me to some bullshit alternative learning place to take online classes. I was also crazy for suggesting that they mainly cared about attendance because it factors into metrics the school has to determine how much money they received. Regardless, I was able to finish the online classes I had in all of three days.

    Don’t know how relevant the story was, but it was fun to share. One, always been a libertarian at heart. Two, the entire school system is a joke run by little pissant bureaucrats. Three, there’s already too much time spent in mandatory schools that make any sort of learning both boring and restrictive. I spent my school years getting harassed and yelled at by teachers and administrators over the stupidest of things. Adults who lacked perspective beyond rules are the rules.

  17. Isn’t the current mantra amongst liberals that kids need less structure?

    1. Less structure from parents, more from the motherland!

  18. Part of the reason we have no nice things part #8929117:

    Eight myths of labor economics every kids is taught in school as axioms, that they have to figure out for themselves are false — Labor Econ Versus the World

    1. Supposed to be reply to jarflax|2.24.16 @ 8:40AM

    2. Every public school knows that’s all myth. The cartoonish robber barons in the unregulated market of the 19th and early 20th centuries were running roughshod over workers., minorities, and women until the government stepped in to correct culture.

  19. Hillary Clinton is a MORON. If that wanker is elected President, I am moving to Belize or Costa Rica.

    http://www.Anon-Net.tk

  20. Expanded school days and shorter breaks are probably beneficial for some kids from single parent households. They are probably useless or harmful for other kids.

    Of course, expanding school days and the school year is an easy thing for a progressive politician to propose: it provides a quick fix for a problem population, it expands government spending, and it makes teacher unions happy. Unfortunately, it’s the wrong solution and doesn’t get at the root of the problem, namely that too many kids live in single parent families with little parental supervision or interaction.

  21. Is that a real book in the picture with this article ? Paging barfman.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.