It likely explains the why the national divide is not only intellectual, it has also become geographic.
True. Being able to vote with your feet is an effective form of voting. It also gives people places where they can do things the way they think is best. And it leads to more rapid advancement in policy, since you get to see if it works better in this state with this policy or that state with that policy.
You clearly would have parents control the complete content and curriculum of their child's education, while I believe that a child's academic education is far too important to be left in the hands of the parents.
Not entirely.
Let's break what kids are taught into: (1) math, science, reading, writing, history, without promotion of a particular ideology, and (2) values (i.e., a particular ideology is promoted as the correct one).
Both left and right are fine with schools delivering (1).
But the left wants schools also to deliver and to control (2), whereas the right wants schools to stay out of (2) and for parents to control (2).
I think it likely that, if educators share a group's ideology, that group tends to want schools in charge of it and to promote it; and if educators do not share a group's ideology, that group tends to want schools staying out of it, and parents in charge of it. If ultraconservatives dominated education, I think it likely that liberals would want educators staying out of promoting an ideology.
I think of ideology as the same as religion. Religion is an ideology. We have no problem teaching things (including history of conflicts involving religion) without pushing a religion. We can do the same and keep ideology out of it.
So do we anything to discuss? I think not. But I suspect the perceived dangers of Liberal ideas might lead to quite a thread. 
Neither of us will convince the other to change his ideology. However, I think it is fun and interesting to discuss things with people who don't share my views.
