Posted by
Alexander Koby on Thursday, November 26, 2009 9:00:00 AM
Starting at an early age, the American people are taught that the structure of democracy exists as a socially accepted fo1rm of governance that is seen as being more favorable to individual liberties than that of an absolutist authority. However, in actuality, pure democracy exists more so as a "social condition;" a construct for self-reliance in which the society is expected to govern itself based on its adherence to a collective balance of principles. The question then becomes, in what ways does education influence the understanding and interpretations of democracy is, or should be?
To examine this topic, references will be made to the political theories of Robert Kirk and John Rawls. The colorful essays of Kirk stand as a testament to an age of traditional conservatism. Respectfully, Rawls favors a more scientific approach to the assessment of modern liberalism. Despite a paradox of discourse from across the political spectrum, each recognizes the preconditions and risks of state-run education. This analysis will address the roles of lower and higher education, along with the impacts of a labor class. The use of example and analogy will form a reinforced consensus of their interpretations.
Knowledge as Power
The basis of democracy begins with the education of the state's children. Education prescribed through generational teachings within the family, or via public institutions administrated by the state. A demystification of Rawls' analysis presents an argument outlining the potential risks for the state's encouragement of family practices that conflict with the common law. Whereas, Kirk recognizes the ominous connotations associated with state indoctrination. The mere mention of the word indoctrination sparks doubt in the state's ability or willingness to administer a suitable education necessary for the enlightenment of malleable young minds. Rather, the state acts to satisfy its base need for producing reliable, unwavering, labors for the overall betterment or society.
Today, America (the state) considers itself to have the foremost state-run education institutions globally. When in actuality, America is ranked among the lowest developed nations for academic achievement. Initially, with the establishment of the National Educational Trust (Circa 1900), the intention was to reestablish a high-functioning society in which all children were offered public resources (state education) to excel academically and professionally. Assuming that an educational system built on a foundation of widespread availability to allclasses of society should flourish in developing literate, well-informed, young people. Kirk persists that the degradation of the educational institution is in-turn jeopardizing the welfare of the state; asking:
"…who can praise an educational system that turns out young people marvelously ignorant--except for a very small minority--of history, geography, and foreign languages, and so, unfitted to have much of anything to do with concerns larger than those of their own neighborhood?" (Kirk, 240.)
Comparatively speaking, without state involvement to quash scholarly ambitions, the dangers of mass dissidence toward the state becomes more likely with each passing generation.
The University
Whether administrated publicly or via private enterprise, primary and secondary schools serve to satisfy the menial requirements of basic knowledge and work ethic. And that, university acts as the institution of higher learning for the select few who are capable of developing advanced techniques for reasoning and imaginative thinking. University is not meant for everyone, Kirk argues.
To both Rawls and Kirk, the societal threat of leveled democracy through education is seen as being particularly dangerous to the longevity of the state. That, within the social construct, a hierarchy of citizenship based upon one's abilities must exist. Acceptance to, or rejection from, the university serves to organize members of society within the hierarchy. The majority of applicants who are weeded out by the rigorous nature of abstraction (sciences and humane studies), will serve as societies career laborers. However, the minority who are fit to fulfill their academic obligations will indirectly confer two beneficial assets to the state. The first is philosophical self-discovery; designed to be a tool of improving the individual as a whole. Second, the preservation and advancement of society, by developing a body or class of young people who will be leaders in many walks of life. (Kirk, 240.)
Kirk's analysis of the university's role within society is to sustain a prudence of knowledge. Similarly, Rawls' insists on a stringent level of selectivity as well, but for slightly different reasons. Kirk defines the university as a means of grooming perspective economic leaders; whereas Rawls' encourages a development of political administrators.1 Both agree however, that without enrollment restrictions and adherence to stringent standards, both the economic and political markets would become oversaturated with seemingly eligible candidates who have only mediocre insights.
The Princeton Example
Founding of the public schooling option was seen to be the cornerstone for a democratic alternative to private institutions. Contrary to popular belief, underlying intensions shared by both public and private institutions coexist in coercing students' social perceptions. During his tenure as President of Princeton University (1902-10), Woodrow Wilson addressed concerns for lagging standards and the curtailment of so-called elitist "social clubs." Though standards were improved, he faced fierce opposition from university trustees in his efforts to dissolve long-standing traditions. Curiously, in 1909, Wilson made the following statement:
"We want one class to have a liberal education. We want another class, a very much larger class of necessity, to forgo the privilege of a liberal education and fit themselves to perform specific difficult manual tasks."
Consider the driving ambitions of the individual to succeed. It is this, subtly overshadowed with the subconscious acceptance social placement that Kirk and Rawls suggest to be the essence of social continuity. Despite an envy of the lower class to the upper, there exists an understanding of one's role within society. It is the exception that each strive to become throughout their predefined roles.
Plight of the Worker
It is U.S. Commissioner of Education William Torrey Harris who, in 1889, best describes the inherent social hierarchy of the state, saying:
"Our schools have been scientifically designed to prevent over-education from happening... The average American [should be] content with their humble role in life, because they're not tempted to think about any other role."
In order to maintain the status-quo of socioeconomic standard, the amount of highly motivated individuals bearing the benefits of foresight must remain in deficit to the labor force so as to maintain a controlled environment. It is through the interpretive ignorance of the worker that dependence on the state is strengthened. By limiting education and providing the necessities of existence, Rawls asserts that the actions of the state define itself as being just. (Rawls, 152.)
Democracy is fulfilled through the satisfaction of wants and desires as they compare to various classes of society. As long as the worker and the downtrodden maintain an accepted level of comfort obliged by the state, these lower classes will be less likely to protest against the elites. (Rawls, 151.) Additionally, democracy is also defined through protected liberties such as freedom of assembly and electoral participation. It is mass circulation of misinformation by the elites, coupled with scattered pockets of poorly educated objectors that perpetuates social indoctrination.
Summary
Can America's greatness be attributed to its democratic methods of governance and education? Consider the redefining of democracy as a tool to suit the interests of society's elite. Education as a forcible means of dissuading contrary behavior of the state's youth so as to remain loyal, productive, citizens. "We Americans stand today politically dominant, intellectually enfeebled." (Kirk, 240.) It's apparent that the authority of an administrating body to govern a society rests primarily with its ability to anticipate the actions of its citizens. For generations, the American people have remained predictable; and through the eyes of Rawls and Kirk, will continue to be.
Despite their objections to the inevitable degradation of society, both advise that only gradual improvements will function to strengthen its former vitality. Quick fixes will be rejected by the administrators and overlooked by the people. Remember that social status and economic vitality define one's standing within the class hierarchy-- none of whom at the top wishes to willing relinquish their influential authority.
1. See Kirk: 239-43. Educational Wastelands, with attention to examples. See also Rawls: 150-4. Denial of the Fair Value of Other Basic Liberties, with attention to ss 45.4.a, b.
Reference
Kirk, Robert. The Politics of Prudence. ISI Books : Wilmington, DE. 1993. Print.
Rawls, John. Justice as Fairness. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press : Cambridge, Mass. 2001. Print.