On seeing his son the first time, a man’s life has cast upon it all at once the most enduring complexity and serene simplicity imaginable. For the tide of his triumph I live, by the tide of his triumph I fall.
I’m on a brief hiatus from writing due to time and energy constraints. Instead of longer posts, I’ve been posting links on Facebook and jotting notes on topics that come to mind for future posts.
My second son Ben was born on October 23rd and, quite honestly, we’ve had our hands full! The mental/physical transition from one child to two is quite different from the transition to your first child - in some aspects easier, in others however, almost inconceivably more difficult.
The experience from our first instilled a sense of confidence that made the delivery, first days, and transition home much less stressful. We knew there would be limited sleep, lots of newborn diapers, and the overwhelming joy of new life. We knew how to hold the baby to support his neck, but also that he wasn’t made of fragile glass. We knew we didn’t have to check his breathing every 4 minutes around the clock - short of an abnormal occurrence, he’d be ok.
The biggest adjustment for me has been the mental realignment required to re-prioritize one’s time, dedication and energy to what feels like two priorities which both seem to warrant being first. I’ve become completely dedicated to an intense relationship with my son, now I have to chop up my thoughts and energy to be divided amongst another human whose development and friendship is also a tremendous value. We’ve struggled with the realization that our time will now be allocated towards the development of two humans, which means A) our oldest son cannot continue to receive the dedication he’s enjoyed until now, and B) our new son cannot receive the same level that our first did. Seems like a loss for all parties until you realize the long-term benefits to all. Teaching a child to think is one of the most rewarding and fulfilling things I’ve ever done, but it takes lots of time and patience to be done correctly. The biggest tradeoff with multiple children is the cost that each one will get less parental energy, with the reward being the companionship of a sibling.
I suspect we’ll see some almost synergistic learning between the two when they get older, and that potential offset is comforting. Most importantly, our boys will be separated by only two years so they’ll very likely be close friends - this is the ultimate reward for the current parent sharing reality.
Work:
I’ve stayed pretty much heads-down in programming over the past few weeks… hopefully things will slow down towards the end of this week. I ended up developing a full Java-based SQL parser that generates ad-hoc model objects for complex queries. The persistence framework now supports standard one-to-one entity/table OR’ish generation and the “sql2java” utility will handle any cross-sectional data that transcend table boundaries, but don’t align wholly with full relational objects, i.e., “Select two columns from every table”. The generation tool just takes the tedium out of setting up such data views. I’ve also templatized support for most of the prevalent MVC-type api’s. Essentially, you point the tool at a schema, generate the entities, generate any cross-sectional models, specify which front-end, and push the go-button. The result is end-to-end CRUD and precise finders for all entities and read-only views of the sectional models. Technically, ~75% of a java based web application will be up and running - depending on how fancy the front-end is.
Music
It’s Galax week. I’ll be heading up for an afternoon or two. Five years ago, I’d be burning a week of vacation to go Monday-Sunday and play music 10-12 hours a day until my fingers literally cramped to a halt - this year I’ll be totally content with a few hours total. Life changes.
Culture
Lots of stuff going on with health care “reform” and economy… none of it good. ;] The only positive I can cite is that it *seems* that more people are waking up to the deadly threat facing us with socialized medicine. Of course the growing objection is only on practical grounds, but this starting point creates a chance talk about the more important moral case for objection. That conversation gets a lot more interesting.
Home
Sam has changed. The first signs of a new sense of independence and freewill caught me a bit off guard. The ubiquitous terrible-twos are here I’m afraid. After seeing him transition into this phase, I’m convinced that all kids reach a point where their expressive cognition exceeds their language and reasoning. How long they stay in this phase and to what extent they actually escape it is largely due to how we as parents navigate the storm.
We’ve established very structured and consistent boundaries with Sam from the beginning and that work is already paying off. He has melt-downs, but in just about every case he can be reasoned out of the mindset. He does very well with either-or negotiations - binary reasoning. An example from a recent melt over leaving our shoes (flip-flops) on at the pool.
Mom/Dad: Either we take our shoes off, or we leave the swimming pool - your choice… but those are the only two options.Sam: Shoes off….
The options have to be reasonable, and more importantly, they have to be absolute. To abandon the established options, e.g., allowing shoes in the pool, is a recipe for terror.
I find his ability to manage and accept this type of communication very promising.
Very seldom do I encounter excellence in-person. It’s rare to meet that individual that leaves you in solemn acknowledgment that some people do strive to summon the best within them; the type that gets so intimately lost in their work that it actually becomes an extension of their existence, under full introspective control.
On Wednesday, I met such an individual. Erin Sage, an obviously prodigenic enthusiast of photography, lent her undivided attention towards the effort of enabling two entranced parents an opportunity to etch their unparalleled era of happiness into memory. She carries an instantly conspicuous manner of warmth and familiarity that becomes insolent once you realize that you’ve just met her.
Her ability to wrangle and seize the essence of the moment demands attention. In a manner that seemed to defy all existential boundaries, she’s bent on finding the right angle, distance and mood to grab a split-second drop of life. Granted, the subject of this engagement offers little in the way of aesthetic obstacles, Erin managed to capture a perception of joy and beauty that must typically evade sensation.
This quote from The Fountainhead comes to mind:
“He had always wanted to write music, and he could give no other identity to the thing he sought.If you want to know what it is, he told himself, listen to the first phrases of Tchaikovsky’s First Concerto–or to the last movement of Rachmaninoff’s Second. Men have not found the words for it nor the deed nor the thought, but they have found the music. Let me see that in one single act of man on earth. Let me see it made real. Let me see the answer to the promise of that music. Not servants nor those served; not altars and immolations; but the final, the fulfilled, innocent of pain.
Don’t help me or serve me, but let me see it once, because I need it. Don’t work for my happiness, my brothers–show me yours–show me that it is possible–show me your achievement–and the knowledge will give me courage for mine.”
I will indefinitely hold her work not only as a persisted tribute to the love and value that Sam adds to my life, but as a vivid reminder of what talented, driven and passionate individuals are able to achieve.
I finally gave in to the most recent reindeer game on Facebook. This turned out to be an enjoyable effort.
This is the initial charter for my new advocacy group. With Sam now a year old, this cause is amongst my highest priorities. My wife and I are restructuring our lives to provide Sam with the highest quality education that we can afford - and which is rightfully ours to provide. At this point I anticipate his education will be a mixture of home-school and private instruction where it makes sense. He will not (so long as my wife and I are alive) spend one second of his precious life in a Public School.
Now we know first-hand what it feels like to realize that the clock is ticking… ticking towards the day where we must be in the financial and legal position to assume our right to control his development. My goal is to prevent other parents from the anxiety, dread and sense of helplessness associated with the current system.
Our Mission:
To perpetuate abolishment of socialized education through promotion of our core philosophy:
1. Primary stance - The moral argument of an individual’s sovereign right to guide the educational development of their own children.
2. Secondary stance - The practical argument regarding the utter intellectual and financial destruction that results from our current system.
Our Rationale:
The moral case for an individual’s right to guide the educational development of their offspring is basis alone for the end of “public” education, however, some may better relate to practical arguments, which will ultimately lead to acknowledgment of the moral argument. There is no sound moral, practical or constitutional argument that justifies socialized education. Like all instances of socialization, rights are violated, the results are abysmal, and the ends, however noble, do not in any way justify the means. One needn’t look very hard to see the degenerative impact our educational system is inflicting – arguably leading to the demise of our United States.
This is not a crusade against all members of Public Education. It is a movement against the system as a whole, and especially those who condone trumping a parent’s right to educate their children as they see fit in favor of social engineering, social justice, or any other irrational collectivist notion.
Consider the following:
Do children have a right to education?
No. There is no right to be educated, but children as individuals do have a right to their life which is held in trust by their parents until they become independent. Thus, parents are responsible for maintaining the child’s life; and encompassed in that responsibility is the parents’ moral obligation to prepare him for survival by leading a rational and productive life. In the same manner that they must teach their child to eat, walk and communicate, parents should also tech skills that enable him the means to become a productive and happy individual.
To the extent that they value the child’s existence, a parent will better prepare him for survival and happiness. Some parents structure their entire lives around providing for their children. Alternatively, some try to alter their lives as little as possible. In cases where the parents fail to objectively achieve this responsibility, the state should justly intervene – as in all cases where ones right to life is encroached upon. Where the line of negligence is properly drawn is subject to debate but irrelevant in the context to the question at hand, except to say that it should be well in advance of compulsory state indoctrination.
In this context, one could consider being educated in a *very* strict sense as a right courtesy of a parent’s moral obligation.
Conversely, there is most certainly not a right to a free education via Government sanction. Such a scenario requires money seized by gunpoint from one individual to fund the education of another person whom he may or may not be familiar with, regarding subject matter he may or may not approve of, and in a manner he may or may not agree with. Nor is it within the proper role of a free people’s Government to mandate such an arrangement as compulsory.
There can be no right properly held by an individual, or his Government, to initiate force against another individual.
Shouldn’t all citizens share the funding responsibility because Public Education benefits everyone?
No. To condone robbery on the premise that the victim may receive some potential future benefit is a perversion of justice. Even if through some clairvoyant cosmic wrangling the victim could be guaranteed a benefit, condoning theft upon him isn’t morally justified. Before I was a parent, I objected to being forced to fund the education of strangers, and as a parent I adamantly maintain that objection. Parents alone are solely responsible for their child’s education, including the costs.
I also object to the claim that Socialized education benefits everyone. On moral grounds, when one individual’s rights are violated, all should take offense. Whatever perceived benefits to “the public” are grossly offset by the mass encroachment of rights they derive from. On practical grounds, compulsory Socialized education is the primary agent facilitating the intellectual and moral decline of our country. The system sacrifices the brightest in favor of mediocrity as it goes through the motions of education along with whatever hodgepodge of social engineering goals it seeks to achieve. The system assumes the right to introduce children to subject matter regardless of a parents wish.
To put it another way:
At age 5, armed bureaucrats will demand your precious offspring - the one with your eyes, and your spouse’s smile, the one you dreamed of, hoped for, delivered, neglected your body for, rearranged your life for, struggled for, worked for, planned for, would give your life for – to arrive promptly at a specific indoctrination camp of their choosing, regardless of locale, convenience or any other metric of the your consent. They’ll then proceed to retain your child for 6-8 hours a day, 5 days a week, 10 months a year, for a minimum of 13 years. Throughout this time, they reserve the right to introduce your child to topics of their discretion and regardless of yours. Your philosophy, values, morals or views are irrelevant. Virtually all protests to their manner will be either casually dismissed, tangled in bureaucratic stagnation, or if you have the time and money you can take legal action which will be resolved according to the views of one of their fellow employees. Alternatively, you can take on the financial and administrative burdens of removing your child from the system, before which you’ll be required to adequately prove to the state your intent to solicit an expensive private institution (without compensation for your compulsory contribution to the system you’ve refused) or to home-school your child, which will require an additional burden of administrative tedium.
How could anyone suggest that this system benefits everyone, or anyone for that matter?
If schools are privatized, my (husband, wife, mother, father, uncle, aunt, boyfriend, mistress) will lose their job!
Maybe, it depends on their competence, productivity and work ethic. A free-market in education will create an unprecedented demand for quality educators. That demand will stir competition amongst educators and learning institutions. Competition will raise wages and add value to the services offered. Those individuals who are good at what they do will be in demand and rewarded accordingly. Like all other professions, incompetent dead-weight will be discarded. The ultimate winner is the consumer, who’ll enjoy teachers and schools competing for their business.
So, hopefully your (husband, wife, mother, father, uncle, aunt, boyfriend, mistress) is good at what they do and won’t lose their job, but will instead enjoy the benefits of working within a system that objectively rewards ability and punishes incompetence. The current system neither rewards nor punishes objectively and the result is demotivated passivity in the best teachers, and downright mooching in the worst. I’ve seen first hand the draining effect this system has on an intelligent and extremely productive individual who maintains an impeccable work ethic - that’s what Socialized education does to its best. Instead of static pay scales, salaries will vary according to ability and achievement. Exceptional educators could expect to be compensated on par with most other commercial markets. Most public school employees would find the notion of salary negotiation a foreign mystery, but that’s the way it works in the private sector and education would be no different.
Many will point to salaries in private institutions, which are often times lower than those in public schools, as proof that educators would earn lower wages in a private market. This comparison is invalid as it attempts to draw economic metrics from two entities which abide by different revenue contexts. Public institutions don’t have to compete for customers, they are guaranteed. Private schools have to operate from a much smaller customer base since Government forces citizens to consume public educational services. The market is much smaller since only those who have the desire and the economical means to seek educational alternatives make up the customer base for private education. There is less demand for private education and those institutions actually have to be economically viable to exist. In order to pay higher salaries, they can’t just tap into Uncle Sam’s taxpayer piggy bank, they have to actually increase revenue. When the market size is virtually pegged the only other alternative is to raise prices, which also lowers demand. When the overwhelming majority of a market is held by force and with economic immunity, supply and demand for labor are distorted. The coercive monopoly of Public Education drives down wages in the private sector.
What about low-income children – will they be left out of a private system?
Some will. Most will not. There would be a small segment of the population where parents don’t value their child appropriately enough to make education a priority. In these cases, private charity would be on the hook to contribute both financially and intellectually. We should expect those so vehemently concerned with this segment to express their compassion tangibly by leading the cause of such charity in response.
The underlying fallacy in this line of thought is that education should be expensive. This is due to the fact that our current system is grossly negligent with spending, functions entirely beyond the proper scope of a strictly education enterprise, and is immune to virtually all economic reality. As the spouse of a former public school employee, and one who keeps up with even the most generous media coverage of the everyday follies of our schools, I can attest to the consistently blatant examples of each of these facts. I won’t go into details in the effort to stay on topic, but I can sum it up as such:
- The system aims to do way more than impart the fundamentals of learning.
- The system wastes lots of money.
- There is very little incentive to be fiscally responsible because they have guaranteed customers who have no choice with regards to what they are willing to pay.
Because of these facts, there is an extremely high demand for quality private education, and an extremely small supply of it – which economically mean high costs in the pseudo-private sector.
Billion dollar budgets and multi-thousand dollar private school tuitions create the pricey façade associated with education, but the reality is that education would be much cheaper in a private system. Competition works wonders in trimming the fat and demanding fiscal responsibility. If a schools’ syllabus is reduced to the bare minimum, but perfectly adequate, essentials of learning – reading, writing and arithmetic – the costs would be only a fraction of what most would guess based on our current education budgets - which include expenditures such as after-school care, Motorsports training, Anti-Bullying initiatives, Community services, Free-Lunch funding and numerous other social-engineering endeavors.*
Funding for Socialized Education is extremely high because the system is more concerned with attempting to offset parental negligence and conduct social engineering tasks than teach individuals how to think, understand and integrate concepts.
This relates to low-income families because education should, and would be cheaper in a private system focused solely on educating kids. Additionally, the same way that lower income individual acquire credit for items such as automobiles and home appliances, there would be a niche market for educational financing.
If there were indeed a segment that unfortunately ended up foregoing their education, this loss would pale in comparison to the monument sacrifice of the current system, which offers wholesale violation of every parent’s rights to educate, every citizen’s right to property (via taxation to fund the education of strangers) and every student’s potential by wrangling them with a 13-year sentence to entrenched mediocrity - all under the guise of education.
*Per 2008-2009 CMS Budget
http://www.cms.k12.nc.us/boardeducation/OrdinancePackage.pdf
What role should the State assume in a system of private education?
None, other than the role it should assume in all private endeavors – as a protector of rights. The state should enforce objective laws regarding life, liberty and property. Contract enforcement through the court system and emergency response to criminal activity by the police are the only proper involvements by Government in education.
There certainly should be no State prescribed educational guidelines.
Individuals carry a wide variety of philosophical leanings that influence their educational goals. If I choose to educate my child under a particular philosophical filter, I have the right to do so. As a very controversial byproduct of socialized education, the debate regarding Evolution/Creationism being taught in school is a perfect example of why the state has no right to meddle with education. Children are not property of the State, which is what State guidelines imply.
Wouldn’t privatization require schools to be run like businesses?
Yes, and such is the answer to our secondary practical stance. Successful businesses are run by the motive for profit, which is a tremendously motivating factor. Profit is the rightful reward for one’s time, thought and energy. Individuals seeking the reward of profit will achieve monumental goals. A school competing for customers will continually seek for means to offer more value. The school who offers the most value at the lowest price will prosper resulting in happy customers. A school could offer value in a variety of forms including technology, alternate techniques, concentrated studies, acclaimed or renowned instructors, convenient location or logistics, superb athletic or artistic environments, or virtually any other component that would appeal to its customers.
Opponents to privatization make the vague claim that “commercializing” education is bad, but reason, economics and the power of the profit motive indicate otherwise. They claim that once a greedy corporation gets a strangle hold on education that their intent to profit will undermine educational effectiveness, but in a private system individuals aren’t forced to consume from a particular institution. If parents determine they are no longer happy with the services, they take their business elsewhere. Either a school exists to meet their needs, or entrepreneurial savvy will seize the demand and create one. Schools becoming “too commercial” (whatever that means) will suffer the consequences by losing customers. Do those opposed to privatization on such grounds continue to solicit companies that disappoint them? If not, on what basis would they contend that parents would respond to bad schools any differently?
A competitive free-market in education would, in time, redirect the intellectual path of our country to unprecedented growth and achievement. The nature of the profit motive is that of extraordinary motivation to seek reward for ones productivity. A system of education driven on this motive would achieve success on par with that of any other commercial market. Who knows when the educational equivalent of Steve Jobs, Henry Ford or Thomas Edison will make his mark?
Everyday I catch myself thinking “I have to remember this…” Sam is growing up so fast, it’s hard to retain it all. I’m starting a list of phrases, images and thoughts that I want to make sure I retain. I’ll update it whenever something new comes to mind.
With 27 pounds, 8 words, four teeth, and immeasurable joy to his parents accomplished, Sam is approaching his first birthday. I’m constantly surprised at how fast this is going.
To say his value to my life is unprecedented would be a pale understatement.
The brilliance of an uncluttered mind is so refreshing. His sense of life projects a contagious reminder of the world as it should and ought to be. If only the high from him looking me square in the eyes and smiling could be bottled and sold.*
I wish every human could enjoy that perfectly seasoned mixture of life, joy, purity, honesty, and the sense of pride that connects it all. Doubtless the bonds we share with our spouse or family members are sacred and intense. On an entirely different level are the bonds held with a human whose expressions can be nearly felt, whose glance so resembles our other half, whose mannerisms are so acutely familiar, and who existence wholly depends on our rationality. In a sense I consider it me that I’m caring for, that it’s my legs learning to walk, or that it’s my security and comfort he clings for. I protect his being with no less intensity than I protect my own - likely more.
His first year of life has been the most cherished, productive and memorable of my own.
* Too bad it would take 10 years and 80 million to slog through the FDA.
I’ve determined that I really like to spend one-on-one time with Sam first thing in the morning. He’s shows a voracious appetite for stimulation and learning after a good night’s rest. Other than times where he’s very hungry or tired, he’s most always in a pleasant mood, but in the morning he’s happy and intuitive. This morning he found quite a bit of amusement from me simply holding and dropping three plastic balls as he sat in front of me. My goal was to help him integrate the concept of objects falling when unsupported - an integration that will come with many bumps and bruises I’m sure.
He’s very close to crawling. He has the arm, leg and torso strength, but can’t coordinate the effort quite yet. It’ll be within a week or so I’m betting. He’s also assembled many of the pieces to the walking puzzle too. With a little more balance, he could actually walk before he crawls. In his current state, he’s definitely showing signs of frustration as he can’t achieve the motion he clearly desires. I already see a strong sense of determination, which I find very encouraging.
Spending time with Sam highlights the importance of a hierarchy of knowledge, which we all accept implicitly, but often do not explicitly identify. In witnessing the progress of a new mind, I’m reminded that adherence to a hierarchy is the only key to progress. Any attempt to shortcut or neglect a step is a waste of time. He cannot even be in the position to crawl until he has the strength to raise his head, arch his back, extend his arms in front of him spaced appropriately to distribute his weight, open his hands to distribute the weight amongst all fingers, bend forward at his waist, and bend his knees and pull his legs up under his torso - all of which require many underlying coordinated movements. And there are only a few sequential combinations of these steps that will achieve his goal without gravity causing him to start from scratch. This is an enormous undertaking for a mind that was blank and a body with virtually no strength only six months ago. So much of our physical and mental aptitude are easily overlooked until you work with a child who’s yet to master basic coordination. To reconsider all the little things required for a task as simple as standing up, tasks that are automated and subconsciously executed, is an inspiring tribute to the human unification of matter and consciousness.
Over the past ~ five months I’ve watched my son’s barely-perceptive trance evolve into a consciousness feasting on sensory integration. I ran across this quote by Ayn Rand today, and it really hit home.
Observe also the intensity, the austere, the unsmiling seriousness with which an infant watches the world around him. (If you ever find, in an adult, that degree of seriousness about reality, you will have found a great man.)
In some ways, Sam and I are both becoming acquainted with reality.
