Benjamin Barber was a political philosopher whose passion was the strengthening of civil society and democratic institutions. He died April 24.
Jan Resseger wrote a beautiful tribute to him, on the importance of public education and the danger of privatization. Her citations from his works are eloquent and powerful. Jan doesn’t mention that Barber criticized me in his 1992 book, which she quotes; I can tell you frankly, looking back, that he was on the right side of the culture wars of that era twenty-five years ago.
She writes, quoting his works:
“It is the peculiar toxicity of privatization ideology that it rationalizes corrosive private choosing as a surrogate for the public good. It enthuses about consumers as the new citizens who can do more with their dollars and euros and yen than they ever did with their votes. It associates the privileged market sector with liberty as private choice while it condemns democratic government as coercive.” (Consumed, p. 143)
“We are seduced into thinking that the right to choose from a menu is the essence of liberty, but with respect to relevant outcomes the real power, and hence the real freedom, is in the determination of what is on the menu. The powerful are those who set the agenda, not those who choose from the alternatives it offers. We select menu items privately, but we can assure meaningful menu choices only through public decision-making.” (Consumed, p. 139)
“Through vouchers we are able as individuals, through private choosing, to shape institutions and policies that are useful to our own interests but corrupting to the public goods that give private choosing its meaning. I want a school system where my kid gets the very best; you want a school system where your kid is not slowed down by those less gifted or less adequately prepared; she wants a school system where children whose ‘disadvantaged backgrounds’ (often kids of color) won’t stand in the way of her daughter’s learning; he (a person of color) wants a school system where he has the maximum choice to move his kid out of ‘failing schools’ and into successful ones. What do we get? The incomplete satisfaction of those private wants through a fragmented system in which individuals secede from the public realm, undermining the public system to which we can subscribe in common. Of course no one really wants a country defined by deep educational injustice and the surrender of a public and civic pedagogy whose absence will ultimately impact even our own private choices… Yet aggregating our private choices as educational consumers in fact yields an inegalitarian and highly segmented society in which the least advantaged are further disadvantaged as the wealthy retreat ever further from the public sector. As citizens, we would never consciously select such an outcome, but in practice what is good for ‘me,’ the educational consumer, turns out to be a disaster for ‘us’ as citizens and civic educators—and thus for me the denizen of an American commons (or what’s left of it)….” (Consumed, p. 132)
“This book admits no dichotomy between democracy and excellence, for the true democratic premise encompasses excellence: the acquired virtues and skills necessary to living freely, living democratically, and living well. It assumes that every human being, given half a chance, is capable of the self-government that is his or her natural right, and thus capable of acquiring the judgment, foresight, and knowledge that self-government demands. Not everyone can master string physics or string quartets, but everyone can master the conduct of his or her own life. Everyone can become a free and self-governing adult… Education need not begin with equally adept students, because education is itself the equalizer. Equality is achieved not by handicapping the swiftest, but by assuring the less advantaged a comparable opportunity. ‘Comparable’ here does not mean identical… Schooling is what allows math washouts to appreciate the contributions of math whizzes—and may one day help persuade them to allocate tax revenues for basic scientific research… The fundamental assumption of democratic life is not that we are all automatically capable of living both freely and responsibly, but that we are all potentially susceptible to education for freedom and responsibility. Democracy is less the enabler of education than education is the enabler of democracy.” (An Aristocracy of Everyone, pp. 13-14)
“Any color so long as it is black”
A choice is on the menu
But menu was imposed
Determining a venue
Where choosing is foreclosed
“We are seduced into thinking that the right to choose from a menu is the essence of liberty, but with respect to relevant outcomes the real power, and hence the real freedom, is in the determination of what is on the menu. ”
One of the things I think ed reformers don’t “get” about public schools is the process of compromise has value. The push-pull between one group of students and needs and another, the effort to work that out, creates community. It forces us to cooperate. Not perfectly! It’s not at all “efficient”! But it’s what makes a town or city a real place instead of just a collection of people pursuing their own ends.
They see this “leveling” as mediocrity- no one student or parent gets everything he or she wants-but it’s really so integral to public systems that to insist it has NO VALUE is to attack the whole notion of “public” as worthwhile.
What makes you think the rephormers don’t get that? All their efforts have been devoted to destroying community, at least any community other than the most privileged.
Community is what neoliberals most fear. If people get together and start talking, they just might realize that there IS another way. There are alternatives. The world doesn’t have to be the way it is set up now to benefit the most affluent.
I read ed reformers because I believe we’re getting rid of public schools with virtually no real public debate. I read them to stay on top of it, because they do dominate my elected officials I can be sure whatever I read will be proposed as a law within 6 months.
They really do want to privatize all schools. They’re not telling the public the truth when they say they don’t.
The goal is “backpack vouchers” and a wholly privatized system:
http://schoolleader.typepad.com/school-leader/2017/05/how-to-give-all-schools-charter-like-autonomy.html?platform=hootsuite
They’re doing this with no broad public debate. People should start reading them.
“Alien Vouchers”
A voucher is a parasite
Implanted in a host
To conquer host without a fight
Til host is just a ghost
You should read these people. The assumption is these decisions have already been made.
They’re currently debating whether vouchers can and should be regulated. Vouchers themselves? That decision has been made.
The arrogance is breath-taking. They throw around the word “governance” as if laws come out of a corporate board.
“Oh, well, GOVERNANCE. That’s a minor tweak we’ll make as privatization spreads”
They’re profoundly anti-democratic. You know why Ohio public schools have elected boards? Because they can’t levy taxes locally without an elected board. That’s “governance”. This is bedrock stuff! It means something! In this instance what it means is “no taxation without representation” . To ed reformers that’s a bump in the road to be rolled over.
This is a piece that is wildly popular in ed reform circles right now:
http://www.houstonchronicle.com/local/gray-matters/article/Charter-school-Wrong-question-We-need-to-ask-11098101.php?platform=hootsuite
Not only is there no real debate on whether we should privatize public schools, they insist there SHOULD be no debate.
We should change state laws and local municipal codes and funding mechanisms with NO public debate because public debate is “divisive” and “distracts” us from schools.
Arne Duncan says the same thing. He says “no one cares” if they privatize schools. He said this WHILE thousands of people in Chicago were hugely upset at what they saw as heavy-handed take-overs of their schools.
They JUST SAW how much people care about public schools. Their Common Core end-run was a disaster. People cared! They cared a lot! They SOUNDLY rejected the arrogant way it was imposed upon them.
It doesn’t matter. They continue to insist no one values existing public schools and no one cares.
National Democratic surveys to donors, continue to reflect a blackout on the topic of education, despite the fact that DeVos opposition accounted for Capitol switchboard’s 3 business days in history. For politicians, money from the privatizers/oligarchy is job protection.
There are several pro-public education bloggers I read daily, and the two at the top of my must read list are Diane Ravitch and Jan Resseger. Thank you for all you and others are doing to keep this issue of preserving public schools alive and hopeful for the future.
The amazing research at the Deutsch 29 blog.
“Privatization is a kind of reverse social contract: it dissolves the bonds that tie us together into free communities and democratic republics. ”
Privatization places individual interests above those of the “Common Good.” Investing in privatized schools equals disinvesting in common schools that are democratically operated, accountable and transparent. When we selfishly pursue our own interests; we destroy other people’s dreams. In a public school all students are provided with opportunity, and one student’s dream does not diminish the dreams of another. A democratic republic should strive for equality and opportunity for all. Fragmented education may contribute to increased social unrest over time. Our diversity is our strength. We are better off as people and a society when we learn from those that are different from us. As an ESL teacher, I learned every day that I taught. What I learned is that despite individual differences, we are essentially the same. Most of us have the same hopes and dreams for our families.
Chilean students are rioting again. They want better free, public education, and they want cancellation of student loans. Unless we change course, we could become the next Chile.http://www.reuters.com/article/us-chile-protest-idUSKBN17D2HL
Just to give you an idea on how privatization creeps in and gets into the bloodstream of a state, look at Ohio.
When charters began here they were supposed to be STATE funded. That was hugely important for a very good reason- you can’t levy local taxes in Ohio without an elected local board. That was deliberate- by design.
But ed reform did an end run. They simply took local taxes as a share of student funding by transferring a larger share than the state provided with each student. So if the state provides 5k per charter student they allocate 7k, hence they just got 2k in local funding with no local input.
Viola! Governance problem “solved” with no public input and no debate.
Watch the governance schemes and watch the creeping funding. These mechanisms are DESIGNED to get around state law.
That is exactly what they are trying to do. When states do these types of shady manipulations, people need to file a lawsuit and challenge the attempt to circumvent the law. If there are no challenges, they will continue to plunder the state.
So beautifully said: “Education need not begin with equally adept students, because education is itself the equalizer. Equality is achieved not by handicapping the swiftest, but by assuring the less advantaged a comparable opportunity.”
Two-tier education is the goal of the billionaires, with the tech firms and Wall Street making money on the bottom tier. The plan is for, for-profit schools-in-a-box for K-12 and, for institutions that, once, provided, university education. The product is an investment of Bill Gates, Pearson, Mark Zuckerberg,…, that has a projected 20% return.
Resseger’s article is a must read for all. She has pulled together some heavy duty quotes from Barber that are not only timely but succinct and perceptively profound.
A few terrific short quotes from Barber mite fit the conclusion
H died a few weeks ago.
Sent from my iPhone
>