Indeed; the idea that there was some intentional shadowy conspiracy to generate docile adults to meet the demand of the state is quite far-fetched. But the idea that the growing demands of the state gradually shaped the educational system seems nearly unavoidable.

Because of the human need for narrative, people always try to frame these stories in terms of heroes or villains and the actions they took. The truth is this kind of thing happens through a kind of emergent behaviour; no one person makes these choices, but they're forced into them through the structure and needs of the organizations they're a part of. On the one hand this seems more mundane and dull, but on the other hand in a way it's more sinister since a human can be stopped or reasoned with, but an organization usually cannot.

Agreed. The Prussian model was designed to turn the product of the entire state into a machine that supported the military, so that it was on constant war footing. The idea that it was primarily for industrial purposes is incorrect. In addition, the author completely misses mentioning the sophists, who started doing this kind of highly manipulated education 2000+ years ago. The author probably would have been served better if she had read Quigley, and understood the ideas that Gato presents in full, rather than argue against Khan, who doesn't seam to understand that this is the way that certain structures maintain their base of power, by creating heiarchy. As Gato puts it, it all comes own to the Calvinist idea that only the elect and few are saved. https://youtu.be/Ho7PPR93XJk