Yesterday afternoon we had the distinct pleasure of having lunch with some friends from The Netherlands. It’s always a treat for me to talk to people from other countries—a double treat, in the case of the warm hospitality of this particular family—if for no other reason than to have direct access to an outsider’s perspective on the affairs of my own people. Fortunately the man of that house is fairly astute in matters of public policy, so we had a good talk about politics.

The topic turned to the American system of public education. They expressed some surprise at the lack of stratification in our system: everybody is labeled a winner no matter what, and distinctions between high achievers and low achievers are considered embarrassing and improper to admit in polite company. You need outsiders to point this out to you? you’re wondering. Isn’t that a rather obvious pathology of American society? Well, no and yes, respectively. But point being that it’s painfully obvious to other parts of the world that in this department we’re not quite right in the head.

Then they went on to talk about their school experience in the 1980s. They said something about a “Reformed school” (meaning a parochial school of the Reformed theological tradition, not a Reform school), which led me to believe they meant a private school.

“No,” the man of the house explained. “In The Netherlands, there are all kinds of different schools, all paid for by tax dollars. Some are religious, some are not.”

“Ah,” I said, assuming he meant a school run by the state church. “We could never do that here because of the First Amendment.”

“No,” he said matter-of-factly. “It has nothing to do with freedom of religion.” He went on to explain that all you need to start a Dutch school is a certain number of students willing to attend the new institution, and you’ll get public funding for it. In his brief account, there was no single authority or central bureaucracy for administering education. Sure, the government imposes minimum requirements on what schools must do, but other than that there is substantial diversity. He was talking about this the way one would talk about having free elections or a publicly funded police force: like it was just the sensible way to organize this particular part of a free society.

This in a country where the left and center-left combined just won 62.4% of the popular vote and 96 of 150 seats in Parliament. And mind you, when I advocate vouchers here, I’m a Friedmanite zealot, probably a theocrat, and maybe even a racist.

So you’ll pardon me if I’m feeling just a bit off today.

• 
• Posted by Tim on Monday, December 11, 2006 at 9:31:33 am PST
• Category: Politics, Culture
• Comment RSS Feed