The authors of the articles in this issue have provided a descriptive, analytic view of the politics of privatization, not a normative one. They have elected to view privatization more as a basic tool of government, with both uses and limitations, than strictly as an issue of ideology. Through their examination of the nexus between privatization and politics, the authors have uncovered instances of bargaining between competing interest groups and government for power and leadership in education. What surfaces from the authors' study of K-12 education is the extent to which the politics of education privatization reflects similar issues and topics in fields other than education. Across the wide array of topics addressed by the authors, the similarities between education privatization and privatization beyond education appear to outweigh the differences. At the end of the day and despite the complexity of the discussions about it, privatization most often entails the recurring political negotiation between and among households and the three economic sectors about the most propitious adjustments in responsibilities for providing, consuming, and paying for goods and services--including education. From this perspective many of the insights provided by the authors about the politics of education privatization could also be applied to privatization's opposite, that is, the study of the growth of government provision of largely privately provided educational services--regardless of what it is called.