For ideologues who see parents as a barrier to State power, the most extreme strategy to remove that barrier is abolishing the family, which translates to a policy of coercive communal child rearing by the State.
Since abolishing the family is practically impossible, a more realistic alternative strategy to remove parents as a barrier to state power is compulsory schooling. This is an effective strategy because it leaves parents with the responsibility for feeding and housing children but takes the kids away to be under the control of the State for large periods of time. This creates lots of time for indoctrination by the State and at the same time reduces the time that parents can spend influencing their children to a minimum.
The case for compulsory schooling as a tool of social control has been made by many philosophers and thinkers including Plato, Luther, Rousseau, Fichte, Horace Mann, and Dewey. Unsurprisingly, The Communist Manifesto advocated compulsory state education in point 10 of the programme. Marx and Engels were unrepentant in agreeing to the charge that they aimed to "destroy the most hallowed of relations when we replace home education by social". The prominent Bolshkevik Bukharin made it clear what the Soviets thought about controlling the education of children:
Society possesses an original and fundamental right to the education of children. … We must accordingly reject without compromise and brush aside the claim of parents to impart through family education their narrow views to the minds of their offspring … the qualifications for educating children are rarer than those needed for bringing them into the world.
The American Progressive movement of the early twentieth century was explicit about the need for compulsory education as a tool of State indoctrination. In Euthenics (1910), Ellen H. Richards argued for compulsory schooling as a way for the State to get obedient citizens:
If the State is to have good citizens… we must begin to teach the children in our schools, and begin at once, that which we see they are no longer learning in the home.
In Moral Education the influential sociologist Emile Durkheim argued for using compulsory schooling to instil collectivist morality in direct opposition to the values of the parents:
we have through the school the means of training the child in a collective life different from home life. We can give him habits that, once developed, wifi survive beyond school years and demand the satisfaction that is their due. We have here a unique and irreplacable opportunity to take hold of the child at a time when the gaps in our social organization have not yet been able to alter his nature profoundly, or to arouse in him feelings that make him partially rebellious to common life. This is virgin territory in which we can sow seeds that, once taken root, will grow by themselves.
American philosopher Alexander Meiklejohn explicitly argued that teacher and pupil are agents of the State:
Education is an expression of the will of some social organism, instinct with one life, moved by one mind. Teacher and pupil … are both agents of the state.