Activity

 10 unchanged lines collapsed
One popular alternative to slavery is called ‘freedom’. As withLike all practices, this one varies. But essentially, freedom means the slave does what he wants. He works on whatever he wants, for as long as he wants. If he wants you to teach him something, you oblige. But if he decides to go on long walks all day, the principled response based on freedom is: ‘Let him.’

Almost every slaveholder is horrified by the idea of freedom. Dr. Samuel A. Cartwright [says](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drapetomania) that slaves only flee captivity because they are mentally ill. Even mostmany slaves reject the idea of freedom. Advocates insist, however, that it works, and psychologists eloquently defend its merits. According to advocates of freedom, a slave is naturally curious. Once freed, a former slave won’t just learn basic skills, they argue – he’ll ultimately find a calling.
 44 unchanged lines collapsed
*Mad Men* highlights even more than that. While virtually all of the show’s viewers recognize the horror in how black people were treated back then, most viewers fail to see that same horror in how our treatment of children has *not* meaningfully improved since. I suspect it’s not something the creators of the show intended to convey – but they did convey it, to a small minority. In certain ways, black people were better off even in the 1960s than children are today: Harris strongly implies that what Cooper requests is illegal – title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 forbids discrimination based on race at the workplace – but there is no law against forced education of children to this day. On the contrary, in many jurisdictions, the law *demands* such force. [Even the UN demands it.](/posts/the-right-to-education-is-bad) In addition, I understand that psychological and scientific ‘findings’ justifying segregation were receding by the 1960s, yet Caplan references both psychology and medical science to justify – and pawn off responsibility for – his desire to deny children freedom. Also, Cooper doesn’t pretendclaim that his ‘request’ is for the black employee’s own good, whereas Caplan does just that when it comes to children.
 3 unchanged lines collapsed
Caplan writes about children, almost like he is addressing them directly: “Every day, like it or not, you have to do 1-2 hours of math. No matter how boring you find the subject, you’re too young to decide that you don’t want to pursue a career that requires math.” This isn’t just offensive to children, but to *mathematicians* as well: to Caplan,Caplan presents mathis not as a wondrous area of exploration and creativity, but as necessary toil – just like picking crops back in the 19th century. He says himself that he has “never really liked” the “piles” – piles! – of math he has done. Clearly, this has been a torturous experience for him, so why should the next generation be spared this coercion? Worse, he implies that some amount of force is warranted to impose his edict on children since he won’t let them disagree. So… how much force? Does he advocate yelling at one’s child? Maybe taking away privileges and toys? Withholding love and affection? Or would he go even further? He does not specify:specify; bad ideas hide in the unstated, as philosopher Ayn Rand explains:
 11 unchanged lines collapsed
In Rand’s example, the basic principle at work is honesty: an honest man who steals once in a while is not an honest man. ‘Balance’ honesty with theft and no honesty remains. The basic principle for our purposes, the one Caplan wishes to ‘balance’ against serfdom to utility, productivity, and career options, is freedom: a free man who has to pick crops 1-2 hours a day is not a free man. A free child who has to learn math 1-2 hours a day is not a free child. Such are the ‘compromising’compromising effects of compromises, of mixed premises and ‘balanced’ contradictory principles.contradictions. The whole point of unschooling is (or should be!) freedom – not productivity, career choice, or “merits”, or that freedom “works” or whatever. After all, the reasoning behind abolition was *not* that free men are more productive than slaves (although usually they are). Mix freedom and forced math lessons and you end up with no freedom at all. Like abolition + picking crops, Caplan’s rotten concept “Unschooling + Math” is a textbook example of mixed premises, and so his vices destroy his virtues. Caplan makes the same old mistake of striking a ‘balance’ between good and evil and making himself look reasonable in the process. He dresses up this alleged balance using, again, the term “keyhole solution” and derides the principled, uncompromising stance toward freedom as “staunch”. What is a “staunch” opponent of slavery but *right?*

In matters of morals and truth, one has to aim for nothing short of absolute purity. Those of us who have fully understood and integrated the moral truth that the universality ofright to freedom is universal, ie applies to children just as much as it does to adults, recognize Caplan’s error with lightning speed – and judge accordingly.

If society progresses in the way I hope, with children becoming totally free, Caplan’s article will age exceptionally poorly. As it deserves. Do not mistake him for an advocate of freedom.