Lets talk opportunity

I had an interesting conversation with a gentleman yesterday that I found quite enlightening. We were talking about employment opportunities, and he noted that there are jobs openings for people here that are not being filled because of a lack of training or lack of education. That is an obvious statement that I have heard many times before, but where he went with his next few statements was an interesting viewpoint. The gist of his statements was, “what would be a very effective means of denying opportunity to a segment of the population if you were so inclined?” Then he switched to slavery in the early 1800’s and, of all things, talked about women in Muslim societies. His point was that slaves in the 1800’s were denied educational opportunities. Also, education of women in Muslim societies is also limited to what men will allow. The purpose in both cases is to limit opportunity for self-improvement and this limits employment opportunities. Our current system is set up so that there is almost a guarantee that the schools in the ghettos will be inferior.  

            Funding for schools in ghettos is generally inferior to that of other schools. The facilities are generally also inferior. The democrats constantly espouse the viewpoint that the only reason that anyone denied a job who is from a minority (Black or Latino especially) was denied because of racial discrimination. This supports the attitude that education is a waste of time. After all, if you will be denied a job simply because you are black or Latino, then what purpose is served by education? The reality is that a person is usually denied a job because the employer is looking for someone who can do the job, and the ability to do the job is dependent on the applicant having certain skills, one of which is basic education. However, this attitude which the democrats work hard at creating serves them well, because the democrats always claim that only they have the solution, more government handouts which come with restrictions that act to imprison the recipients with more government control limiting self-reliance which leads to further government control ad nauseam.    

            So, if you want to deny employment opportunity to a group of people, then you can set up a system which will provide inferior education and complement this with a strategy of telling the people that any and every employment denial is because of their race. This is a two-pronged strategy which effectively denies the tools for economic success (education) and instills a negative attitude towards education which lessens the chance that the minority will pursue education.

            How can you ensure that the education opportunity is inferior? Well, one thing is obvious. The people must be given only one choice for education. This is the democrat’s position. They claim that all education must be supplied by only the government. It is a classic Hobson’s choice. Choose this or nothing! How can I make this assertion? The democrats vehemently oppose any kind of educational choice programs (such as voucher systems) where the oppressed people may be able to choose something better than what the government wants to cram down their throats. The democrats claim that the only solution is to throw away more money in the government dictated education system. It is clearly obvious that more money does not necessarily translate into better schools.

            I will end with this last comparison. In the early 1800’s, the slave owners purposely provided either no education or the absolute minimum required for the slaves they owned. This ensured that the slaves had little or no chance to improve themselves. Today, the democrats insist that the only education available must be government supplied. The education opportunities being provided for minorities is generally inferior, and the democrats intend to maintain the status quo by denying the people a path to choose better education. Does there seem to be a similarity between then and now?