Quel est donc le gauchiste qui a prononcé cette virulente critique de l'inégalitarisme du système scolaire américain :

I don't see how we can maintain a decent society if we have a world split into haves and have-nots, with the haves subsidizing the have-nots. In our current educational system, close to 30 percent of the youngsters who start high school never finish. They are condemned to low-income jobs. They are condemned to a situation in which they are going to be at the bottom. That leads in turn to a divisive society; it leads to a stratified society rather than one of general cooperation and general understanding. The effective literacy rate in the United States today is almost surely less than it was 100 years ago. Before (...), the majority of youngsters were schooled, literate, and able to learn. It is a disgrace that in a country like the United States, 30 percent of youngsters never graduate from high school. And I haven't even mentioned those who drop out in elementary school. It's a disgrace that there are so many people who can't read and write. It's hard for me to see how we can continue to maintain a decent and free society if a large subsection of that society is condemned to poverty and to handouts.

Bien sûr, si vous regardez sur Google, vous n'avez pas le droit de répondre (attention, je vois tout).

Question bonus : que préconise-t-il pour remédier à cette situation ?

Réponse le 22 juillet à 14h50 : Il s'agit, comme l'a trouvé Elessar sans le dire vraiment, de Milton Friedman. Le point ne lui sera pas compté, car il a forcément zieuté sur google, sans quoi comment aurait-il su que j'avais zappé une partie importante du texte ? La partie en question, je la restitue :

Before government had any involvement in education, the majority of youngsters were schooled, literate, and able to learn.

Forcément, si j'avais laissé ça ("une belle connerie" d'après LSR), le jeu eût été bien plus simple. Ce qui m'a intrigué, dans ce propos, de la part d'un ultra-libéral comme Friedman, c'est cette idée selon laquelle une société inégalitaire ne peut pas être décente et libre. La liberté individuelle ne suffit donc pas.

Son remède, naturellement, est le chèque-éducation, qui consiste à donner à chaque famille une subvention lui permettant d'inscrire ses enfants dans une école privée de son choix :

If you want to subsidize the production of a product, there are two ways you can do it. You can subsidize the producer or you can subsidize the consumer. In education, we subsidize the producer—the school. If you subsidize the student instead—the consumer—you will have competition. The student could choose the school he attends and that would force schools to improve and to meet the demands of their students.