Dear Yuyutsu,

The Amish in the US are not forced to attend state primary schools. They can and do set up their own primary schools. They have a tradition which other groups might copy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rumspringa tells about it. They have a great deal of autonomy. They have their own schools, and they pay for their own schools. It is illegal in the US for the government to subsidise non-public schools. Australia should copy.

I almost agree with your statement following, “Nationhood is comprised of common ambitions. I find it wrong and oppressive to impose nationhood (in other words, supposedly-common-ambitions) on people merely because they happen to live in a particular geographical region. The larger that region, the more wrong it is, as less [fewer?] choices are available!

I am indeed deeply shocked by the current Australian government's talk of "nation building".

Where I disagree is that the reality is that small nations in general cannot defend themselves against absorption by a larger nation next to them.

I also agree (with some reservations) with the statement:

The less the state interferes in people's lives, the more it is possible to accommodate very-different groups within that state without oppressing any of them.”

The reservation I have is the state can make it possible or harder for people to live together. Communities can have their own schools. However, if they have their own schools they should fund them themselves. Taxpayer funding should be restricted to public schools.

Then I look at your statement, “but look at the people of the Middle-East: do you consider them mature enough to not interfere in each others' affairs?”

The people of the Middle-East are human beings. They are not a homogenous group. Some of them are quite mature enough not to mess in each other’s affairs. Others like some in our society are in the grip of primitive ideas. Iran which is run by a group of primitive clerics has a large part of its population that are quite well-educated and I am sure are mature enough to not interfere in each others' affairs.

Csteel.
Appreciate the letter of 1993 from Arafat to Rabin, relevant and timely in this post. On the other hand, whilst the rhetoric of Arafat is to be lauded, the results appear not to be evident 'on the ground' as it were. Without letup, the rockets were sailing over the boarder even as the letter was being written. Hamas was evidently not a party to any agreement made by the Palistinian Authority.

To this day, Palistinian media, schools and every form of communication refer, not to 'Israel' but to the "'48 territories" .

When Arafat undertakes to "submit to the Palestinian National Council for formal approval the necessary changes in regard to the Palestinian Covenant", the "approval" was never given?

And still the rockets fly and still the children are taught that Isreal will be wiped out by the blood of the martyres who, by good fortune, will receive 45 virgins for their effort.

@ Prompete,

“And still the rockets fly and still the children are taught that Isreal will be wiped out by the blood of the martyres who, by good fortune, will receive 45 virgins for their effort.”

Only 45?

Boy, there are going to be a lot of pissed-off martyrs up there who thought they’d be getting the full quota of 72!

Dear David F.,

It was good reading about the Rumspringa - thanks, but that wikipedia-entry did not contain the word "school". I admire the Amish way of life, but unfortunately I couldn't join them because I don't share their religious beliefs.

<<Where I disagree is that the reality is that small nations in general cannot defend themselves against absorption by a larger nation next to them.>>

Indeed, sadly external threats are the limiting factor on how small a state can be. Otherwise for example, Israel, with populations so much at odds with each other, should have naturally been broken down into 2-3 different countries, not counting the Palestinians.

<<Taxpayer funding should be restricted to public schools.>>

Why? What makes it right to take money from everyone then give it back only to some (not even on an economic basis)? The best is if every school-aged child received a fixed amount in educational vouchers, sufficient to pay for a public school. Subsequently, these vouchers can go toward public schools, private schools, private tutors, books, etc.

<<Others like some in our society are in the grip of primitive ideas.>>

The tragedy of the Middle-East is that the silent majorities are silent and in the grip of those primitive, violent minorities.

----
Dear Prompete,

<<will receive 45 virgins for their effort>>

The original number was 72, making us wonder who is taking 37.5% tax!

Dear Yuyutsu,

The taxes of people without children who do not use the public schools still pay for those schools. People with children who do not choose to use the public schools because they wish to indoctrinate their children have the right to do so. However, like people without children they still have to pay for the public schools but should not expect the general public to pay for indoctrination.

The public schools are for all children and are funded from general tax revenues. Schools that are not for all children should not be funded by tax revenues. That is the way it is in the United States, and I think that is the way it should be in Australia.

I think it is good for children to go to school with children of other traditions and cultures and people to live together with people of other traditions and cultures. If people wish to segregate themseves and their children it should be funded by the taxpayer.

We differ on that point.

The article on the Rumspringa did not deal with schools. I referred to it because I thought it interesting as a way the Amish deal with the outside world. There is some literature written by Amish who have made the choice to leave the community. The Amish and Mennonites are both descendants of the Anabaptist tradition. They are pacifists who are for the separation of religion and state. They have been persecuted in many countries but have found refuge in the US and Canada.

Dear David F.,

<<We differ on that point.>>

I suspect we don't, after all.

You see, when a voucher is given to a child for education, it is given for EDUCATION, not for indoctrination and/or segregation.

So, if a [private] school is deemed to be an institute of indoctrination rather than an institute of education, then it is not eligible for the voucher system. However, if the school also teaches reading, maths, science, etc. then it should be eligible for that portion of what it does. Naturally if the student devotes most of their time there to indoctrination, then the vouchers will fall far short of funding that school.