‘Conscription and Mr. X’

Responding to Edwin R. Thompson’s letter condemning military conscription, Ronni Shalit writes that she wants government to conscript 18-year-olds to “serve their country” by forcing them instead to work either at schools, hospitals, or police stations. This, she argues, would not only “benefit society,” but also instill in them “a sense of duty” toward “something greater than themselves” [“Conscription and Mr. X,” November 2, 2004].

Ms. Shalit derives her position from a corrupt premise she holds about free nations, namely that there are “duties and obligations” an individual must fulfill to enjoy the rights “granted to him” by that nation. But government does not grant men any rights. Instead, rights are inherent in man’s rational nature, and government is obliged strictly to uphold and protect each individual’s right to his life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

This means that no man has any duty to serve anyone, nor is he obliged to benefit anyone other than himself. Each individual has the right to pursue his own happiness, including voluntarily joining the military or any other career, to trade values for values with other men, while respecting their rights in the process.

Yet Mrs. Shalit characterizes her alternative activities to military conscription as “a choice” for young people. But whether government forces an individual to join solely the military or to perform any of a variety of altruistic duties, this amounts to compulsion and violates his rights that government exists to uphold as inalienable.

To every individual, nothing should be greater than his own life and his right to live it as he sees fit by his own free will.

JOSEPH KELLARD
Oceanside, N.Y.

Battle Over Teachers Pact

A hint was let out by sources close to the mayor that he would rationalize a wage increase as reform in the form of an alleged productivity increase [“Battle Erupts Over Terms of Teachers Pact,” Dina Temple-Raston, Page 1, October 27, 2004].

I specialized in productivity increases, as a systems analyst, and was married to a veteran teacher. We found that well-meaning chancellors, who attempted to apply business methods to their chaotic “system,” should have stuck to applying them to the purchasing and construction divisions.

Students are not merely products; education does not lend itself to the same methods of productivity. The administrators and mayors confused more teachers time at school and in teacher education courses with productivity.

It was hinted that to justify a salary increase, the mayor will demand an extra week of teacher-but-not-student attendance at school. This is an old ploy.

So also is basing pay increases on teacher education courses that are notorious for being insubstantial. There is no positive correlation between teachers staying more at school by themselves, and student performance. It is like a form of punishment.

There would be a negative correlation. One of the major problems in New York City public education is the flight of experienced teachers from a system that harasses them in such ways.

Teachers need a few days before classes to get organized. The administrators and schedulers need another few days to prepare the way, but their efforts are hampered by the system’s not having ready the budget and a realistic roster of incoming students. Most semesters therefore start off in chaos. What good would it do for teachers to arrive days earlier, without students?

Even in a factory, not really analogous to schools, workers cannot be productive without the raw materials to work on. “Productivity” has become the politicians’ new pretense at getting something for taxpayers in return for union pay increases. It often is not realized. Misapplied in the case of teachers, it is counterproductive.

There is a struggle over how to reform public education. Politicians want to put ideologues and high-priced administrators in greater control over teachers. The union wants its member professionals to be freer to apply their experience. And The New York Sun has suggested that competition from vouchers and charter schools would induce reform voluntarily. The new teacher contract could cost more money to further demoralize the professional staff. As the Sun puts it, spending more if not wisely doesn’t improve results.

RICHARD H. SHULMAN
Manhattan

Are There Facts?

In his column, “Here We Go Again,” David Blum furrows his brow incredulously and wonders if I “really believe there’s such a thing as facts anymore?” [Arts & Letters, November 2, 2004].

In a word: Yes.

DAVID WESTIN
President ABC News
Manhattan

---

Please address letters intended for publication to the Editor of The New York Sun. Letters may be sent by e-mail to editor@nysun.com, facsimile to 212-608-7348, or post to 105 Chambers Street, New York City 10007. Please include a return address and daytime telephone number. Letters may be edited.