Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Obama and the “Superman” School Predators
The corporate media, right-wing billionaires like the Wal-Mart family, Bill Gates and President Obama, are all in the same business. They are trying to create a private market in for-profit educational services that can be traded on the stock market and bet on derivatives but whose costs will be borne by the public. They project this public educational market to be potentially worth trillions of dollars – at virtually no risk to finance capital. That’s why the hedge funds are now so deep into charter schools. But, to transform the public schools into a privately-exploitable market requires great volumes of skillful propaganda, to convince the public that Wall Street and hedge funds will “save” public education.
The movie “Waiting for Superman” is the latest, and slickest, of this corporate propaganda. It is a profoundly predatory film, in character with the predatory finance capitalists that are its biggest boosters. The film shamelessly exploits five Washington, DC school kids and their desperate parents, seeking to win a lottery placement in a charter school exemplified by a 24-hour public charter boarding facility called The Seed School, where student life is “centered around dorms…named for a college or university,” each housing 12 to 15 kids. There are only 15 students for each teacher. On its face, this truly does seem to be a public educational wonderland. But, as mass propaganda for urban charter schools, it is the most cruel and evil bait-and-switch imaginable.
The nation’s public schools are in the deepest crisis in memory. It is a money crisis, which has led to the most draconian educational cutbacks in modern times. Teachers have been fired by the tens of thousands, curriculum scaled back to the bone all across the country – yet this film callously dangles a 24-hour prep school as a real and palpable possibility for the millions of educationally underserved in the inner cities. A live-in prep school is supposed to stand in for charter schools as a whole, despite the fact that more charter schools perform worse than their traditional public school counterparts than those that test better, nationwide.
“Waiting for Superman” is a scam and a sham, that has been catapulted into the national political conversation by a $2 million marketing grant from the Emperor, himself, Bill Gates. In the most perverse sense, it is appropriate that Washington, DC’s Seed School is featured, since Gates and the hedge fund billionaire parasites consider their cash contributions to charter schools as “seed money” from which will grow a hybrid, publicly-funded school system where profiteers will flourish. In the last decade, these finance capitalists have enlisted a cadre of Democratic politicians to wage war against teachers and against the very idea of public education, exploiting the historical grievances of Black parents, especially. Barack Obama is the highest expression of the success of this privatizing project, so it is no surprise that he endorsed “Waiting for Superman” as only a president could, hosting the film and the five kids at the White House. But do not be fooled. The film performs the same function for the corporatizing of American education as the movie “Exodus” did for the founding of Israel. This ain't “Roots.” Rather, it sets the stage for the uprooting and destruction of public education.
[This was a Black Agenda Radio commentary by Glen Ford]
- Posted in



123 Comments so far
Show AllEducation for money instead of money for education; how things get done in the us of a ! Tony
Glen understands Gates' and the other megacapitalists' strategy better than most.
Glen's next article should address the megacapitalists' recent pleas for the wealthy to donate more to "charities", read donating to the foundations owned by the megacapitalists that channel money to megacorporations like Monsanto to spread patented seeds to every corner of the globe.
What's the best evidence that education achievement is proportional to money spent? The US is near the top in the world of per capita expenditures.
Jake, Your posts are good evidence.
LOLOLOLOLO!!!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!
Are you saying that I went to a school district with a high or low expenditure per student?
Do you have anything serious to discuss or are you just a joke?
Gotta discuss this comment: The US is near the top when it comes to educational expenses. First, not all American kids get the same amount of money for their educations: in my district we get 7100 bucks per student; in another district in my state they get 13000 per student. This situation is not unusual in the US. So there is the inequality issue. Then there is the question of facilities: I'd like to compare the facilities of, say, the Chicago Public Schools with those of Japan or Singapore or Germany. A lot of urban schools should be closed throughout the US for health and safety reasons. Next, let's talk about the money spent on Special Ed in this country as compared to other countries. We spend far more on students with disabilities than most other countries. I am not saying we should reduce that number necessarily; I am only saying that a fairly large percentage of our educational spending does not reach average kids in average schools. Now consider the needs of American students: the US has a higher poverty rate than most other developed nations with good schools. More kids do not speak English as their native language; more kids come from single parent homes. Would it not make sense that such a population would require more money to educate its children?
The main reason kids do not do well on tests is that they and their parents are convinced that you are born smart or not, that C's are acceptable, and that getting good grades is neither possible nor especially desirable. In Asia, in most of the rest of the world, people don't feel that way. They believe that through hard work everyone can succeed. Moreover it is not a bad thing to excel in school--it does not diminish popularity (as it does in a fairly large number of schools here).
So, in the sense that the values that underlie education determine outcomes on tests, you are right that money doesn't make any difference. Only tell me, how will you go about changing the attitudes Americans hold about teaching and learning? I sure as hell tried when I was teaching and was not especially successful. What would you do?
"Only tell me, how will you go about changing the attitudes Americans hold about teaching and learning? "
A very good question and I for one don't know the answer.
Under the current system the most viable solution I would think would be for teachers to use their pension funds to open up new charter schools based on a ParEcon model. Teachers also should make more of an effort to engage students rather than instruct them. Teachers should be students as well. We should make the same efforts for exceptional students that we make for "special" ones at the very least.
So you favor schools for profit. You know that means there will be good schools and bad schools--and the end result will be that the best schools get the best teachers, the best facilities, a challenging curriculum, and the best students and the other schools--let's face it, the public schools--will get the rest. With public schooling you at least have an elected board responding to the needs of the community. With charter schools you have a board that is not elected at all. Charter schools have ways of cherrypicking the best students, whether by geography, marketing, establishing a curriculum most kids cannot cope with. And they will have ways of sloughing off the problems: "We don't have personnel to deal with non-English speakers, kids with learning problems, kids with behavioral problems."
No, I don't believe in teachers supporting for profit charter schools with their pensions. It goes against every atom in my body. Always I have believed that every student, poor or rich, smart or dumb, should have the very best education we can deliver. And since we are all one community, then all kinds of kids should learn together--different races, social classes, different religions. Schools do a lot more than teach facts; they promote values like good citizenship, too. Don't think charters can do the things public schools can in that regard.
What about his idea of starting schools, but not having them be for profit or falling into the charter school right-wing ideology?
This isn't just an issue of funding and the fact that public schools are being systematically destroyed for the privatized schools instead. There would still be issues of textbook selection, willful ignorance wrt the teaching of evolution, and a lot of malformed priorities in terms of how much attention sports gets as compared to subject matter even if this particularly malignant ideology wasn't around.
The real question you are asking is, Are charter schools a better platform for change than public schools? I would argue that public schools can be just as good or even a better platform. In my own district we have a separate high school for at risk kids, a Montessori elementary, programs for science-math-technology, possible early enrollment in college while attending high school, voc-ed through the intermediate school district starting in the eleventh grade, and probably lots more. And our district only has 10,000 students. The charters around town are just "academies" offering the usual curriculum and instruction to a special population of students mainly consisting of the upper middle class. That is not to say charters could not offer innovation--sometimes they do. And if a public school system is poorly run, charter might be the only way to go for change. If I wanted real change, I would go first to the local district and tell them what I wanted. If they did not respond, I would develop my own solutions whether they would be homeschool or charter. However, with homeschool I would try to enroll my child in at least some public school classes--music, art or something. Kids need to be around kids from other backgrounds and homeschool does not cut it.
No, I'm not asking whether charter schools are a better platform for change at all. What I'm asking is this:
Based on the very real possibility of the destruction of the public school system through capitalist machinations and the resultant deficit hawking, might it be a good idea for people who actually want real teaching for their children to set up alternative schools, so that way while we try and put things back together, those children aren't funneled into either the private schools or the religious schools that'll feed them propaganda?
This isn't supporting charter schools.
DROSERA: Excellent post! One could add to it, the cultural climate that pushes fast sex, wild cars, and lots of drugs/alcohol.
I remember as a teacher hearing teenagers (mostly boys) brag about their plans to "get wasted this weekend." As we know, sometimes this rite of passage leads to fatal car crashes.
When youngsters, especially boys, see the culture champion brains (intelligence) the way it champions the brute, naked force of its athletes, then we may see a better attitude inside the classroom. (That comment is intended to complement all the wise points you related.)
I lived in Singapore, and sometimes I would take the university bus "home." It was very common to see children in their school uniforms getting out of classes at 6 or 7 P.M. The ambition to learn was so alive that it palpably imbued the atmosphere.
And when I was in Japan, the same thing: families cared about the education of the children. Sometimes, too much. I would trade all the facts crammed into the heads of Asian kids for the simple ability to think problems through. It really isn't so important to know how many representatives in the House of Representatives, for example, but it is important to apply the principle of natural selection to explain why the wholesale administration of antibiotics to humans and animals can create pathogens from relatively harmless bacteria. As it is, we get neither one: memorization or thinking.
Lets assume that privateizing the schools gets the whole country and there are no public schools left. What happens to the kids that dont "reach" the standards set by the charter schools? Re-education camps like China; out in the street; parents pay extra for disruptions? All of this with our taxes going to a private co. out to make money and that means the corp. pays out the minimum per unit (student) so that the they can maximize profit. All educational personnel will be hired with the corp. firmly in mind as the bottom line and not the unit. The future sits on money and blood and guts "persons" are being phased out of everything but the payments. Tony
And he didn't say, "I told you so," even once.
Google Black Agenda Report to see their prescience on Barack Obama. They saw him coming and had him made before you ever heard of him.
Ask an Obamabot if they ever heard of the Black Agenda Report and they will look at you like you just asked them about the composition of rock on Jupiter's north pole.
As a Gas Giant, it is unlikely that there are rocks on Jupiter of any kind.
Is that an Obamabot response?
The geology of other planets or our own knows nothing about politics.
Point taken.
(But mightn't you say the same about Obamabots?)
don't feed the far, far to the right of any Obamabot troll...
There are *STILL* no rocks on Jupiter. *yawn*
Know what a metaphor is? If it helps, think of Venus or Mars instead...
What actually lies at the core of Jupiter is still basically anyone's guess. It has been proposed that it could even be a big diamond.
At last! A reason to fund NASA.
Hey, Jake, you made use of a bit of poetic license here. By stating the
"Geology (of other planets or our own) KNOWS nothing..." you granted cognition, or sentience, to the lowly rock. Interesting. We mystics have always honored the Spirit of each kingdom (plant, animal, mineral, and beyond)... I had no idea you shared that sensibility!
Damn! And I stepped on his poem. Why didn't you say something sooner?
You might like the way a favorite author of mine, John McPhee, humanizes geology by traveling with and writing about geologists. Annals of the Former World is a combined volume of four books. Those four are Basin and Range, In Suspect Terrain, Assembling California, and Rising from the Plains. Annals contains additinal essays I think. Much of his other writings are about man in nature, Coming into the Country about Alaska and people who live and work there, The Pine Barrens was an early one about the Jersey Pinelands, and recently the Founding Fish, a book about Shad. johnmcphee.com
"Is that an Obamabot response?"
*****muffled guffaw*****
Jake is a self-proclaimed McCainian.
Why muffled?
the more the left and the democrats triangulate and moderate towards the center only brings about an increasing shift towards the right - further and further towards the right.....
so obama's biggest failure is in NOT FIGHTING the battle and trying to instead negotiate and moderate.....
but I'm pretty sure obama knows this and is doing EXACTLY what he wants.....
I myself do not buy the "obama wants to do the right thing if the mean republicans and the bluedog democrats would only let him"
what bullshit
and the education secretary - arne duncan is a rightwing predator hiding under the cloak of the democrats who either buy into his market approach for everything or are simply timid, fearful and idiotic....
so arne duncan and obama are 2 peas in a pod!
the saying "with friends like this who needs enemies" - comes to mind.
Yeah, education ought to be about profit and producing students who do as they are told, regurgitate standardized information, not ask the wrong questions and can do well on a standardized test developed by private interests for profit.
Yea! I will be sure and vote straight D in November! Rah Rah Rah
Straw man. The fact that DC spends as much as it does and has poor performance stands.
Ah the apologists for the status quo come out the woodwork, right on cue. Vote D in November!
Did you even read the article? Please do, Glen Ford will teach you a thing or two!
Another straw man. *yawn*
Now stay focused. Do you think the output of the public schools in DC is particularly good?
You are a giant straw man, read the f-in article and then comment on it. All you want to do is divert attention away from it because is it critical of the D paryt status quo.
Read the aricle, are you afraid to?
Spend more money? You lied! The article does not say that.
Grow up and learn how to read, maybe if you got a good education it would have helped.
Ariana Fluffington is a big fan of Arne Duncan and Obama education policy, maybe you should bugger off to Fluff Post where folks are more gullible.
It seems the D-party reactionary loyalists are getting desperate as November approaches. Who cares? The Duopoly wins either way
My comments regarding money relate directly to the article. First he says:
"The nation’s public schools are in the deepest crisis in memory."
Which I agree with. But when he declares:
"It is a money crisis, "
He provides little support. When he then says:
"which has led to the most draconian educational cutbacks in modern times. Teachers have been fired by the tens of thousands, curriculum scaled back to the bone all across the country –"
He offers no detailed analysis to support the evident idea that money would solve everything.
The US spends near the top per capita in the world on public education, yet lags behind scholastically. Why? When this question is suggested to you or asked directly, you put up straw men. I predict you'll do it yet again.
As you should know per-pupil spending varies wildly in the US and wealthy districts spend more. Poor ones don't have the money. And its getting worse.
So privatizing the public education system is the answer, that way money can be made from lower income districts. They can cherry-pick good students to boost their test scores and earn more money. It is a great business model, I must say.
Good work guys, now if the Rs regain control of Congress maybe they can finish the job.
"As you should know per-pupil spending varies wildly in the US and wealthy districts spend more. "
Yes.
"Poor ones don't have the money."
DC was cited as having a *high* expenditure per student.
"So privatizing the public education system is the answer,"
Straw man again. Hey, I was right about that.
What hypocrisy, what the f are you trying to say then?
Are you shillin for Ds or Rs I can't tell the difference.
"what the f are you trying to say then? "
That we should question whether the problem with education, across the board, is simply a lack of money. And when that question is raised, one should not make the straw man argument that the questioner favors privatization of the whole system.
So again, what exactly do you propose then? I really don't get it, you seem to be disingenuously over-simplifying the argument to divert attention away from the larger picture. If that is not the case, please explain with some detail
"seem to be disingenuously over-simplifying the argument "
Concentrating on one aspect of the problem, money, is not oversimpifying and doing so is not diengenuous. The "larger picture" as you put it, is complex. There are many other aspects. Some of it could be physical such as money or infrastructure but I think there are aspects that reflect values and attitudes.
For the 3rd time: What exactly is your position on the issue if it is not privatization?
Quit squirming and answer the question.
I have no specific proposal. Education is not my area.
Of course that doesn't negate anything I've said though.
Thank you for honesty, although belated.
Thank you. I often just ask questions. None of us can know everything, that is one reason we ask questions.