The historical problem that public education has tried to solve is the masses with neither the money, the time, the energy, the intellect, nor the ability to educate their kids. Public education hasn't been a part of history until… fairly recently in history. What did we have? Massive amount of ignorance, the majority of the population unable to rise in society and get a higher standard of living because they lacked even basic literacy, concentration of wealth and power amongst the few that could afford education, etc.

Yeah, sure, many Americans rose to prominence without any compulsory state schooling. In fact, the same could be said of *everyone* before the advent of public education. They had no choice, because there was no public education. But they were in the tiny minority, and this minority, for the most part, was privileged enough to hire private tutors -- they were all "homeschooled"! If you were the king of Macedon, you could hire Aristotle, the most famous thinker of his day, to be the private tutor for your son Alexander. And if you were poor but you had the mind of an Aristotle or Benjamin Franklin, you could educate yourself. If you were poor or average in intellect, then you were out of luck.

In the larger context of history, homeschooling is a luxury. Parents have to make enough income and have enough free time to teach their kids themselves, or they have to make a lot of income to hire a good tutor for the long run. I know of a Harvard graduate who worked as a live-in tutor the children of a immensely rich family. Servants came to her luxurious apartment in her employer's mansion every morning to open her curtains and to serve her breakfast in bed (if she so desired). Alright, not every homeschooler is this rich, but there is definitely a base income and free time you need to have.

So I find Gatto's quote quite misleading and blind to history.