Public Education or Public Indoctrination?

Have you been to a public high school lately? Maybe it is just the one I was in, but between the signs on the walls and classrooms, and what the kids tell me about their teachers and what they are learning, I get some distinct impression taxpayers are funding a leftwing indoctrination program for our children.

I can't tell the difference between our schools and the faction of the labor movement that believes the future of the labor movement is not in "bread and butter" issues but is social justice and liberal causes and politics.

I don't want our schools indoctrinating our kids with left-wing activism or right-wing activism. I want our schools teaching "the bread and butter issues," the basics.

If there are going to teach about controversial and hyper-partisan issues that the country is divided on, they should be required to explain different points of views. Our schools should be a safe place to hold different points of view without feeling intimidated or afraid to speak up or disagree, that is not true today in many schools for many kids.

I’m delighted that everyone’s classroom is an LGBTQ safe zone, I only wish it was a safe zone for kids who do not hold left of central ideological beliefs.

It is great that we are making huge strides to protect and recognize minority’s, no matter how few their number. Maybe one day we will be able to have the same respect for those who find themselves part of more significant minority groups.

What do you think would happen if a high schooler wore a “Make America Great” shirt to school for picture day, or how about a shirt that quoted the second amendment? Those who are more conservative, or support the president often feel less safe and welcome than those of other minority groups who receive constant support and recognition.

I am disgusted by our education/indoctrination system. It may just be one of the greatest injustices of our time, the social-political hijacking of our youth.

Comments

When Government Demands Papers We Refuse

By Matthew Hayward 9/19/2025 The Supreme Court just paused a lower court order that had limited federal immigration stops in Los Angeles. That stay lets federal agents resume roving patrols and interior operations that critics say rely on appearance, language, job, or neighborhood to pick people for questioning. This matters because it normalizes a posture of suspicion. Checkpoints miles inland and roving patrols turn movement inside the country into a condition to be earned rather than a freedom to be enjoyed. The government already claims expanded authority inside the 100-mile border zone. That claim, plus an open green light for stops based on appearance, is a recipe for arbitrary enforcement. Philosophy of resistance John Locke told us that the consent of the governed is the foundation of legitimate power. When rulers invade life, liberty, or property, or when they become arbitrary disposers of people’s lives and fortunes, the social compact is dissolve...

The National Guard Was Never Meant to Be a Federal Tool

By Matthew Hayward 7/13/2025 Let me say this clearly: the National Guard was created to defend the states, not to enforce the will of the federal government. It was meant to serve as a local militia—an armed extension of the people under the control of the state. The highest authority a Guard member was ever supposed to answer to is their elected governor, not a bureaucrat in Washington, not a federal agency, and certainly not a sitting president weaponizing military force on domestic soil. Yes, I know the laws have changed. I know the Montgomery Amendment, the National Defense Act, and the Supreme Court's decision in Perpich v. DoD rewrote the rules. But legal doesn’t mean constitutional. Gradualism doesn’t legitimize usurpation. You don’t get to trample foundational principles and call it progress. What’s happening now—federalizing state forces to deploy them in cities without gubernatorial consent—is blasphemous. It's an insult to the very spirit of the Constitution. The ...

How the Drug War Killed Liberty

By Matthew Hayward 10/25/2025 When the State Declares War on Behavior Earlier this month, President Trump ordered United States military strikes off the coast of Venezuela, killing alleged “narcoterrorists.” He later boasted, “ We’re just going to kill people that are bringing drugs into our country. ” Those words should chill every American who believes in liberty. Fifty years after Nixon declared his war on drugs, it has evolved from domestic raids to international executions, all under the same failed philosophy that government violence can cure human vice. When the state declares war on human behavior, it always loses and takes the people down with it. Every prison cell, every overdose, every cartel bullet is a monument to the arrogance of government trying to legislate morality. Back in 1988, Ron Paul said it best on The Morton Downey Jr. Show: “You can’t legislate morality. You can’t force people to be better by passing laws. If you want to solve moral and social problems, y...

Search This Blog