I was chatting with a buddy the other day. Why is it so hard for people to see that the basis of a true idealist liberal state is freedom of option? I, being as versatile and ever-changing in ways not even known to myself, (indeed) favor liberalism, BUT that's not to say I don't support many elements of socialism. In fact, many of my friends would like to see socialism in the US. Clearly, the US is a free society, one of only a few in the world. So why is it so hard to understand that it is more important, in fact, NECESSARY to provide and allow access to, but not make mandatory, universal education.

My friend's argument was that as a community, everyone prospers and excels, both on an individual basis and on a collective basis, when at least basic high school education is mandatory. How foolish. I don't believe that for a second. I believe that educated people run a society, but life experience and a sense of being content is more important for the entire populace. Hell, somebody needs to gather the crops, someone needs to work the mills, the machinery, do the grit work. So if people are fine with doing that, and I know there ARE people who are, education is completely unnecessary. Sure, those working crappy jobs tend to want to aspire higher, but that does not mean that education has to be mandatory, especially for those who live quiet secluded lives in rural parts of the country and all over the world, or even those who chose to seal off their community to the rest of the world while they circulate their own practices and trades.

If it's a matter of freedom, liberalism relies on CHOICE and AVAILABILITY. But going so far as to push people to an education no longer falls under any category of liberalism anymore.