Someone has to lose

A political ad came on tv recently. The candidate said something to the effect of, "Maryland students deserve a great education. I will make Maryland schools second to none."

Let's disregard, for now, the claim that people "deserve" this or that. Let's also disregard, for now, the haughty claim that this candidate is invariably destined (and, thereby, has the capacity) to drastically affect schools. As an extension of the last blog post, I want to comment on the phrase, "second to none."
Second to none means, simply, first. If my fried chicken is second to none, then based on some standard it is better than all other fried chicken. Of course, this also means that some fried chicken is worse. As soon as we develop and implement this standard and as soon as we start to judge by it, statements such as "well done" or "well attempted" are lost to "it's better/worse" or "you win/lose."

Another way to say this is that we stop caring about adverbs, and focus on adjectives.

Here's the point: making Maryland schools second to none might seem like a caring endeavor. But the fact that Maryland's schools are first means that someone else's aren't. In reality, trying to make Maryland schools first could mean trying to make other schools bad. While that is not the goal of the candidate, neither is equal education for all. Rather, winning is the goal. Maryland schools must be best in order to judge them as a success.

I'm quite serious. If we are to be steadfast in making Maryland schools first (even assuming the standard to gauge that is legit), we're also saying that Maryland kids are better and deserve more than other kids. Otherwise, it wouldn't be ok to try to make our schools first. If we say that all men are equal, we can't try to give unequal opportunities by making our tribe of schools or hospitals or courts second to none. The best we can do is to do the best we can do. And somehow I find that to be a little more motivating than making us better than Nebraska.

When a standard is judged by adjectives, one must evaluate the ends to make the judgment. The ends can only be evaluated by comparison through competitive means. But when we use adverbs to describe a standard, we are able to look at the means and the heart and the motivation of the issue/person/goal.

We don't need a loser in order that we can win. But only if we redefine winning.

How about this as a campaign line: "Maryland citizens and students are well-served by a great education. I will try to make Maryland students feel valued and make them smarter in the process."

What's your campaign line?

Awake late on a night where I have to wake up soon,
-Brody