There is a kind of poverty that is materially poor but rich in a lot of practical ways. There are towns in rural Italy, where an old couple lives together in a stone house in the mountains. She has a flower garden, and he sits on the balcony to smoke and read in the morning. That couple is poor by American standards. They shop at the local markets, eat eggs from their neighbour's chickens. Healthcare is covered by the state. Their church is not fancy. Their clothes are bought from the town market. 10 euro sandals. But they own their house and did not have to spend 40 years being exploited by a bank paying for it several times with interest. They just bought it outright. They are loved by their neighbours. They can walk around their towns safely because its not packed full of 60IQ savages (for now). The food they buy is not poisoned. The work the did when they were younger: teachers, nurses, engineers, was just real and normal work. They didn't feel the need to come up with elaborate schemes to become millionaires. Their grandchildren visit them every weekend. This, too, is wealth. The goal is not to make everyone Elon Musk. The goal is to make a system where this kind of nonna nonno wealth is achievable for more people.

The rise in HomeSchooling is further evidence of the failures of the modern state. School was not always an exam-centred pressure cooker with toxic peer relations, incompetent teachers and dumbed down curricula tied with a ribbon of corrupt values and marxist, homosexual supremacy. The schools you read about in LM Montgomery's Anne of Green Gables, the early 1900s schoolrooms produced excellent, articulate, well rounded, intellectually healthy children. Of course it is true that homeschooling was also very common in the pre-war time period. Many artists, writers and inventors were homeschooled for at least a portion of their education, especially, their education before ten years of age. However, the alternative, "normal school" was not a terrible option either. Reading a curriculum from that time period, the letters written by those students and seeing the kinds of writers and thinkers that system produced is testament to the quality of the schools from that time period. The purpose of education is not merely to train the child for a job but to prepare his mind to think critically, give him the basic general knowledge of human civilization, history and natural science and to teach him how to learn. It is an indisputable fact that some people are better at some things than others. One of these things would be the vocation of teaching children. The idea of schooling, traditionally, is to give the task of the teaching of children to the best people for the job in a given community. Furthermore, in high trust communities, parents not only knew that the teacher was someone they could trust and had similar values to them, but parents also knew that the other children were being parented with similar values as well. The school environment wasn't hostile by definition. While the HomeSchool community today brushes aside conversations regarding the social benefits of traditional schooling, I have never seen a compelling argument about it. The most intellectually honest response is that lack of socialisation is a trad-off one is willing to accept in favour of the many worse things that come with "socialisation" in a modern school. Children in traditional schools in healthy communities when the state actually fulfilled its duty to the people, in fact do have much better socialisation opportunities. They are also exposed to teachers who would certainly have been much better teachers than their parents, not necessarily due to intellect alone, but due to attention toward that vocation. The heterogeneity of communities, values and the truth that increasingly teachers have a hostile relationship with parents, makes schooling an unwise decision today. When your children interact with other school children, they also come up against the bad habits and poor values that other people's parents either actively instil them with, or that they develop through rank moral neglect. As education became consumed (and degraded) by bureaucracy and school became a proxy for baby sitting so that both parents could go to work, the whole idea of schooling was lost. Now, most schools are a den of corruption, vulgarity, violence and the propagandization of children to the state religion of sodomy, feminism and marxism. People are turning to HomeSchooling not because it is the best option, but because it is the better option among others. But it would be remiss to point out the things that children miss when they no longer have access to a system that connects them to their community in this way. The mother, doing a thousand things in the home, now must do this too. Even the smartest mother in the world would not be the ideal choice compared to a teacher whose whole vocation is teaching. But compared to the idiotic, indoctrinated, mentally challenged specimens teaching schools today, perhaps the average mother is better. All things considered, the trend toward HomeSchooling is reflective of a low-trust society generated through forced heterogeneity of values, and a hostile marxist liberal government and culture that pushes its values of depravity onto everyone else's children. Modern schooling is at best a waste of time for children and at worst a serious corrupting force. But if the option exists to put children in a wholesome school environment where they can make friends and encounter truly good teachers, I would take it in a heartbeat.