Ron Paul: Hey, Teachers, Leave Those Kids Alone

Ron Paul

Ron Paul may have left the House of Representatives, but the libertarian icon is far from done working to bring more Americans to the cause of liberty. The former Congressman’s latest audience, however, will not be legislators on Capitol Hill or crowds of voters; rather, Paul is taking small government ideology to the segment of the American population that many a politician has termed “our future.”

At a time when the debate over the amount of government intrusion in schools is continually a hot topic, Paul has launched his own home-school curriculum for students whose parents want to avoid having their children educated to Federal standards.

Not only does the curriculum offered up by the politician-turned-polemicist offer parents the benefit of protecting children from government indoctrination in the schoolhouse, but it also provides an alternative curriculum that promises to provide “education in liberty like no other.” While offering courses of study for K-12 students in the basics, Paul’s program of study also includes some things government-run schools often leave out (mostly to keep the population from being educated enough to understand the folly of allowing government total control over anything).

A quick overview of some of the materials provided on the Paul Curriculum website makes clear that students will be enlightened by the ideas of great Austrian economists and encouraged to be self-made citizens as well as vocal defenders of liberty. Alongside reading, writing and arithmetic are lessons on starting a home-based business and creating a successful social media presence.

Historian and Economist Gary North, the program’s director of curriculum, put it simply that the educational track is designed to “teach the Biblical principle of self-government and personal responsibility” and give students the tools to recognize threats to their rights.

“Students will be exposed to thinkers they would never encounter in a government school. They will know history and economics better than anyone their age,” libertarian political and economic powerhouse Lew Rockwell writes in an opinion piece about the program for The Daily Bell.

North notes on the curriculum website that accreditation is not in the cards for the program of study, saying: “It is a sign of the almost overwhelming surrender of parents to the state that the parents, while saying they are fleeing from the state’s schools, desperately want to use a curriculum that is accredited by the state. They are terrified of their own ability, meaning their inability, to teach their own children. They have no confidence in themselves. They do not have confidence that they can look at a curriculum, and then decide whether that curriculum is good or bad. The state has completely bamboozled them.”

But, given the idea behind the Paul curriculum, lack of government approval will likely not provide much of a turnoff for liberty devotees. And any indication that the course of study may be half-baked is quickly put down by reports that Paul has been thinking about and working on the curriculum with the help of libertarians like economist, author and historian Thomas Woods since 1971.

Paul also offers something government run schools never will: a guarantee.

From the website:

Membership in this program comes with a 100% money-back guarantee.

If at any time, a student or a paying parent thinks that this site’s program is not worth the money, he can cancel and get a full refund. This is good for a full academic year, plus one month: ten months. All he has to do is send an email asking for the refund on the day he cancels.

I want everyone who signs up for this curriculum to be to happy. I am confident that most students will see the value of it. But no one can please everyone, as I discovered in Congress. So, I want everyone to know that I bear 100% of the financial risk.

This offer also applies to each of the courses, for which there is a fee. They also come with a 100% money-back guarantee. The same time limit also applies: nine months.

The Ron Paul Revolution, it seems, has only just begun.

Personal Liberty

Sam Rolley

Sam Rolley began a career in journalism working for a small town newspaper while seeking a B.A. in English. After covering community news and politics, Rolley took a position at Personal Liberty Media Group where could better hone his focus on his true passions: national politics and liberty issues. In his daily columns and reports, Rolley works to help readers understand which lies are perpetuated by the mainstream media and to stay on top of issues ignored by more conventional media outlets.

Join the Discussion

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

  • Vigilant


    “MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry recorded a commercial for the network in which she stated that children do not belong to their parents, but are instead the responsibility of the members of their community.

    “We have never invested as much in public education as we should have because we’ve always had kind of a private notion of children. Your kid is yours and totally your responsibility. We haven’t had a very collective notion of these are our children,” she says in a spot for the network’s “Lean Forward” campaign. “So part of it is we have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents, or kids belong to their families, and recognize that kids belong to whole communities.”

    • mnkysnkle

      My children belong to me. Their first community is the family. If they want to belong to the “other community”, it’s my job to educate them and inform them before “they” choose to join. It’s their choice not mine, yours or the community‘s. It’s your duty to provide the education. If you choose to let the state educate them, then that’s your failure by surrendering your responsibilities and setting your child on a path of ignorance and subservience. You do know: It’s easier to push your face into the sand when your “leaning forward”?

  • Deerinwater

    “Historian and Economist Gary North, the program’s director of curriculum, put it simply that the educational track is designed to “teach the Biblical principle of self-government and personal responsibility” and give students the tools to recognize threats to their rights.”

    Hmm? ~ I always suspected that was what was behind Ron Pauls curtain. That could be a good thing or a bad thing as defenses and support for any position one might claim, can be extracted from biblical text by the faithful with a belly full of righteousness in their cause. The burning of evil witches is a hard act to follow.

    This would permit those people outside this Holy Perception, left with having to argue with God . Not something that I’d like to see taking place, today or tomorrow.

    A slippery slope to climb for people that like to claim personal freedom and liberty for everyone.

    If this study program is done well, ~ without requiring blind faith ~ it could be a effective curriculum. ~ while still it’s programming with it’s own tilt.

    • Steve E

      Truth has no Tilt or agenda. All you have to do now is learn what truth is.

      • Dave

        The bible is not “truth”. Thats why “faith” and “fact” have very different definitions.
        What is “true” in your mind may run against “fact” in reality. Not saying it is but in education, “god, “Christianity”, “Islam” should not be anywhere near the cirriculum. If I want to teach my kids religion, that is up to me. Not a teacher.
        I can handle morality just fine, I do not need a collection of fables known as the bible to tell me what right and wrong is.

    • The Snarf

      Yadayadayada. Burning witches,revisionist versions of the crusades,centuries-past mistakes of what is only one church out of many. Why do anti-religionists never have any objections that are relevant for today?

    • Michael Shreve

      A curriculum is only a foundation the TEACHING completes the structure. IF a atheist uses the,curriculum it is unlike the result will be a Christian. The Result will, however, NOT be an indoctrinated drone.

  • GeorgeWiseman

    I’d like to see Ron Paul’s curriculum add two features.

    1. A basic legal education, so people will know their way around a courtroom. It’s VITAL to understand how the legal system is supposed to be used to protect our rights and freedoms. Most people are ignorant and get abused by ‘the system’. A good basic education (for $250), understandable at 8th grade level, can be found at

    2. A basic understanding of the income tax code. Learning to handle money well is vital to everyone’s financial well being. The book ‘Richest Man in Babylon’ teaches the basics of what it takes to be rich and points out that a nation of rich people make a rich nation. One thing most people don’t know is that the USA income tax is voluntary, and HOW to opt-out of paying income tax. A good ‘course book’ on how to opt-out (and get back money that you didn’t need to pay) can be found from links at

  • For real

    I think that evolution should not be taught in schools . It can not be proven it is a theory a stupid one at that and devalues the human superiority over animals it has no place in our schools

    • Jeff

      So the Bible should replace all biology books? Is evolution a stupid theory in connection with all creatures, including bacteria whose evolution in real time is what enables them to become resistant to antibiotics, or just as to humans? Or is it just as to your family? I don’t think someone who writes a post like yours should be so liberal with his use of the term “stupid.”

      • identitee

        Interesting that you think there are only two options in education … teach evolution or teach the Bible. Why not teach the EVIDENCE and let students defend their own conclusions?

    • Being real

      Spoken from a true religious idiot. Like your religion should not be taught in schools either since it’s also not proven. Human superiority? Yea very superior when we still think there’s invisible entities in the sky. Stick to your bible and Sunday school and don’t vote cuz your an idiot.

  • r.p.

    Of course there will be those agnostics and athiests who will fear the aspect of a “biblical based” education in self government and individual liberties. Little do they know that their liberties enumerated in our constitution and in a much older document called the “Magna Carta” are based on those “biblical principles” which have always championed liberty, freedom, and personal responsibility for you own actions. These concepts are not just based on the teachings of the bible, but based on the “word”, and that word is “truth”. To some “truth” is a hinderance, to others “truth” is a religion. You don’t have to teach about God to teach the truth, but you better have the moral character to practice the truth. And that can be found in the bible.

    • Deerinwater

      So are you attempting to offer us ~ that if the Jews had not written the bible that we would be somehow without principals today?

      WoW! ~ But really ~ where do morals come from?

      Does something have to be written for it to be true or real?

      There are many names applied to many moral doctrines ~ Christian is but one. In any case ~ they are all something to “aspire too” ~ and with most ~ it’s a “hit and miss” situation.

      It is the zealots among faith based religions that make me nervous ~ all that is needed, is to “install” one of these egg heads into a position of power ~ and “Houston, we’ve got a problem”

      Some of the brightest minds in history met their final demise by confronting people that like to call themselves devout , God fearing Christian.

      Anybody can claim themselves to be a Christian ~` There is no 2nd or 3rd party to validate such a claim. Leave us to judge by deeds. ~ If Weiner likes to show his “weiner” but claim that he didn’t. ~ Did he?