Federal Involvement May Not Be the Answer
March 10, 2011
By Justin Case
The White House, for those paying attention, has recently taken on one of the major issues related to federal policy—school yard bullies. Phew, with every thing else going on, as the Middle East rages, as the economy again teeters on the brink, and as a budget crisis looms (even as it is ignored by both parties), we thought they’d never get around to this most pressing issue of childhood bullying. And, if they hadn’t, we’d all be left without the necessary guidance that the federal government alone can provide on this crucial issue, one that we certainly cannot deal with on our own without federal assistance, along with Cowboy Poetry, of course.
Not to worry, the School Yard Bullying Prevention Act of 2011 and the creation of the Federal Department of Bullying Prevention (FDBP) will surely and quickly address the issue (although like most federal interventions it will never rectify the problem), and at a cost of only $50 million per bully. That money, as well, will create or save jobs at a similar cost, as one bureaucrat will be assigned to each bully, with a small staff of 30 social workers or so. Utopia, or one small slice of it, will then have been achieved—for government workers that is (not for the rest of us who will be on the hook for $50 million per bully and perpetual funding for the newly created FDBP).
A group of radicals though (some call them ordinary Americans), have come up with an alternate plan. The plan, already under attack by progressives because it wouldn’t cost a dime, offers the following guidance and recommendations to federal policy makers and goes something like this:
Mind you own business and let people deal with bullies on their own.
The radicals (the new term for people who prefer to manage their own affairs) offer a scenario as well that has been known throughout human history to counter the negative psychological effects of bullying while at the same time building character for all involved, bullies included. Again, all at no cost to taxpayers—which, again, precludes support from the Obama administration.
Here are the radical guidelines:
When faced with a bully, look him squarely in the eye (that is key), then sock him squarely in the nose with all your might. Really let him have it.
In 95 percent of the cases, studies show, the bully will then begin to whine and cry while holding his bloody nose. The blood, being deep red in color, facilitates the desired outcome (bullying prevention) by impressing the experience deeply in the bully’s psyche. In the future, when faced with bleeding, as a result of bullying, he will gravitate toward better choices.
Alternately, the child targeted by the bully picks up a 2 x 4 and whacks the bully up side the right ear (left ear for the left handed). This method though incurs a small cost for 2 x 4 procurement, though the 2 x 4 can be recycled when the next bully gets clocked up side the head.
The beautiful thing about this simple and time honored technique of giving bullies a taste of their own medicine is that the bully then stops being a bully and tries to make friends with people, recognizing the futility of trying to dominate others, and as he seeks self esteem in more appropriate ways—like Qaddafi after we blew up his house, though now he’s fairly certain there will be no price to pay for his behavior.
Another plus is that the one previously being bullied experiences a sudden spike in self esteem (the goal of public education, not academic prowess), as he discovers the fulfillment that comes through the exercise of moral courage, and as all the other kids show him (or her) newfound respect for that courage.
In the private sector, we call this a win/win situation, actually a win/win/win, because not only do the two parties involved win (in the bullies case he wins by losing), but the taxpayer wins also. The only loser is the federal bureaucrat at the FDBP, who now must find a real job.
Of course, there is one other loser. That would be the President of the United States, who can’t seem to get a handle on the reality the new radicals represent, those who, in traditional American fashion, prefer to take care of themselves without any help from government.