Fairfield City Schools Ignores Voters: A new form of slavery through public education
The excessive arrogance and result of the public education monopoly can best be summed up with the Fairfield City Schools bond issue which just failed recently in the November 2013 election. The vote was close, but after a recount it held and the tax increase was defeated. But the school simply declared that they would put the issue on another ballot six months later in May of 2014, when fewer people were thinking about elections. Their not so subtle message to the tax payers of Fairfield City Schools is that they can get their money from the tax payers, and will eventually no matter how many times they must put the issue on the ballot. State run schools like Fairfield, Lakota, and Little Miami operate as a monopoly so tax payers have no choice but to put up with the antics—and lack of respect that these administrations have for the communities they reside in. In the case of Fairfield—“they” want new school buildings and have already made plans for the money they don’t yet have.
RELATED: Fairfield school bond issue fails, triggers recount
MORE: Will you be asked to pay more for your schools?
The school district was pushing a 2.62-mill bond issue so it could move forward with construction plans on those buildings. The bond issue was designed to pull $19 million from the state of Ohio to help with construction of new schools. The bond issue was intended to generate $61 million for the project. Most of the media covering the issue simply covers the symptom of the problem, but avoids the problem because of the controversial nature of doing so. The 61 million pound elephant in the room is the source of that controversy—that voters turned down the tax, the “state” is ignoring those results and is imposing upon the residents of Fairfield another vote—then another—then another—then another until it passes. This happens because Fairfield City Schools is a government monopoly no different from a license bureau, the IRS, the NSA, or the Executive Branch in WashingtonD.C. The State acknowledges that the administration at Fairfield wants new school buildings, so the government monopoly has set up a system to implement the acquisition of the needed funds by hook or crook. One way or another—the voters will be defeated eventually and the school will gain the ability to rob their desired money from the community they reside in—by legal means ordained by the “STATE.”
Channel 9 at least covers the stories. If they hit any harder they would be black listed by the institutions in covering the feel good stories that make people happy—and view the local news, like the story of the Lakota band performing in the Macy’s Parade on Thanksgiving. Or the Fairfield football games which tend to unite a community behind the common cause of public education. It is too difficult for them to do a report about how the schools are using the poor children as public relations chess pieces for the ultimate goal of raising taxes and imposing themselves upon the communities that are forced through monopoly rule to support them. The implications of such admissions require courage, and a change in how society educates its children—and nobody is ready to deal with that. So the crimes continue to be committed, and voters are ignored, abused, and disrespected in every way possible.
For Fairfield schools to propose before the official count was even final from the previous election that they will pursue another tax increase in May of 2014 is an arrogance that can only come out of a monopoly that views the tax payers as their personal slaves. There is no gentler way to put the issue. It’s not slavery in the classic sense with plantation owners and human beings placed in literal chains—but the same basic ideal is at play here—property owners are chained to inefficient government schools by law, and beaten financially not with whips—but elections until the product of their labor is forcefully confiscated for the benefit of the State. The tax payers who voted NO in the last election—will be ignored and forced to the voting booth until they give up—which is no different from beating another human being with a whip on a plantation until they comply to the master holding the whip. If any reporters reading this disagree—explain the difference other than the typical progressive framing of the slavery argument to advance discrepancies of race relations. Slavery isn’t about the color of a human being’s skin—it’s about what kind of shackles control the behavior of other human beings. In the classic case it was actual shackles—in the modern sense it is virtual ones—those owned by banks, politics, and the collective will of democracy.
Is it any wonder that voter turn out is so low? People see how the game is played. During the last Lakota election, it was a numbers game. No Lakota Levy had defeated three previous attempts, but eventually people just stopped showing up. Most people figured—“what the heck. If we vote it down, they’ll just come back in May with another attempt—or August, or next November. They’ll never stop until we give them the money—so why even show up to vote?”
That is exactly what the “State” wants people to feel. “They” want their subservients—the tax payer—to know their place—to know that the beatings will come until they submit because there is no place else for them to go. If Fairfield residents decide to move from their homes to Lakota, Mt Healthy, Mason, Lebanon or anywhere in Ohio, they will be greeted with the same oppressive system of public school financing—the same limited choices—and the same beat downs during every election. So the only option available to tax payers is to submit to the authority of the State and the whims of the school board backed by radical unionized government employees.
If it’s not slavery—then what is it? What better way is there to describe such a system? There isn’t one, and the mainstream media really doesn’t have an answer to the problem either. Since children are used as extortion pieces, the media compromises and focuses on the feel good aspects of public education instead of the root of the problem which is the slave-like relationship the tax payer has with public schools like Fairfield. The intention of an election is to let the majority determine the shape of their community through a democracy. When the tax payers voted NO on the 2013 levy, they indicated that they rejected the proposed 2.62-mill bond issue. They decided through an election that they did not want new school buildings. Yet, Fairfield, since they didn’t get the money decided that they’d simply put the issue on the ballot a few months later and try again rather than revise their plans. The will of the voter was ignored and the State backed school imposed themselves upon those tax payers with the gentle reminder that the tax payer works for the school; it is not the school that works for the tax payer. The relationship is one of slavery where the tax payer is forced to provide the effort of their labor to the school regardless of whether they want to or not. When a vote is ignored—which is what is happening—the indication from Fairfield and the state of Ohio which supports that public institution is that the institution is the master—as the tax payer is the subservient. There is no other way to view the situation. It’s as bad as it sounds because the literal meaning of elections that are manipulated or ignored is that the State is in charge of every life that feeds it—and that relationship is best explained as a master living off the effort of its slaves. Everyone who pretends otherwise is helping the system continue to abuse the people suffering under the tyranny of injustice known throughout the public education industry monopoly represented here by Fairfield City Schools.
Rich Hoffman
