Theoretical: The Ultimate Nanny State

[weemadando]

Now, I was contemplating this earlier today.

We work to prevent the exposure of children to a great many things in our society, through passive measures such as censorship and ratings to inform and attempt to limit access and active measures such as law enforcement and education.

But we don't really give a shit about what parents expose their children to, as long as it isn't "dangerous".

But how do we define dangerous? Drugs in the house is one thing that is certain to get child protection agencies involved, but what happens when we have religious parents failing to vaccinate their children? In Australia, they actually GET PAID to do that.

So what would happen if the state was to raise children in a way that wasn't some "golden mean" bullshit. For example, not allowing religion into their lives until they are old enough to reasonably avoid indoctrination, or perhaps instead having them study multiple religions alongside each other. Add to that a proper medical upbringing (fully vaccinated, all ailments treated in the best interests of the child, even looking at full dietary regimes and requirements).

Effectively, the children are raised in such a way that at the age of 18 (or appropriate age of legal majority) they are fully educated, healthy and in theory, not indoctrinated to any religion or philosophy and ready to become productive members of society.

Now, obviously this could never happen, but what are peoples opinions of the idea as whole, excluding of course, the obvious issues of state bias working it's way in?

Would people allow their children to be enrolled in such a program, or have themselves monitored as parents under such a program?

[The Grim Squeaker]

Assuming the (ludicrous) existence of a state who's goals and beliefs matched my own so well, then I'd agree to being monitored.

Of course, that's a wildly optimistic scenario, we all agree on vaccinations but what about education (Liberal or to be a tradesman)? nationalism/patriotism? Maybe I want to teach my children to be competitive, or to teach them to work towards the greater (international good) and not local? Maybe I want to give them only a secular jewish education and not a fully secular one, or maybe I want to teach them comparative religions but to favour Buddhism over christianity?

Now, obviously this could never happen

Indeed.

Would people allow their children to be enrolled in such a program, or have themselves monitored as parents under such a program?

I would, but it would be pointless, since the people who would agree to such a program are the ones who agree with all the points in it, unless you offer very strong incentives. (And that's ignoring the privacy issues, and that many people might object to such intrusions from the government into their lives on a matter of principle.)