“Across the globe, a new historical
conjuncture is emerging in which attacks on higher education as a democratic
institution and on dissident public voices in general – whether journalists,
whistle blowers, or academics – are intensifying with alarming consequences for
both higher education and the formative public spheres that make democracy
possible. Hyper-capitalism or market fundamentalism has put higher education in
its cross hairs and the result has been the ongoing transformation of higher
education into an adjunct of the very rich and powerful corporate interests.
Marina Warner has rightly called these assaults on higher education, 'the new brutalism in academia.'[i]
It may be worse than she suggests. In fact, the right-wing defense of the
neoliberal dismantling of the university as a site of critical inquiry is more
brazen and arrogant than anything we have seen in the past.
“What we are witnessing is an attack on
universities not because they are failing, but because they are public. This is
not just an attack on political liberty but also an attack on dissent, critical
education, and any public institution that might exercise a democratizing
influence on the nation. In this case the autonomy of institutions such as
higher education, particularly public institutions are threatened as much by
state politics as by corporate interests. How else to explain in neoliberal
societies such as the U.S., U.K. and India the massive defunding of public
institutions of higher education, the raising of tuition for students, and the
closing of areas of study that do not translate immediately into profits for
the corporate sector?
“The hidden notion of politics that
fuels this market-driven ideology is on display in a more Western-style form of
neoliberalism in which the autonomy of democratizing institutions is under
assault not only by the state but also by the rich, bankers, hedge fund
managers, and the corporate elite. In this case, corporate sovereignty has
replaced traditional state modes of governance that once supported higher
education as a public good. That is, it is now mostly powerful corporate elites
who despise the common good and who as the South African Nobel Prize winner in
literature, JM Coetzee, points out ‘reconceive of themselves as managers of
national economies who want to turn universities into training schools
equipping young people with the skills 'required by a modern economy.[ii]
“Viewed as a private investment rather
than a public good, universities are now construed as spaces where students are
valued as human capital, courses are defined by consumer demand, and governance
is based on the Walmart model of labour relations. For Coetzee, this attack on
higher education, which is not only ideological but also increasingly relies on
the repressive, militaristic arm of the punishing state, is a response to the
democratization of the university that reached a highpoint in the 1960s all
across the globe. In the last twenty years, the assault on the university as a
center of critique, but also on intellectuals, student protesters, and the
critical formative cultures that provide the foundation for a substantive
democracy has only intensified.[iii]
“Coetzee’s defense of education
provides an important referent for those of us who believe that the university
is nothing if it is not a public trust and social good; that is, a critical
institution infused with the promise of cultivating intellectual insight, the
civic imagination, inquisitiveness, risk-taking, social responsibility, and the
struggle for justice.
“Rather than defining
the mission of the university by mimicking the logic of the market in terms of
ideology, governance, and policy, the questions that should be asked at this
crucial time in American history might raise the following issues: how might
the mission of the university be understood with respect to safeguarding the
interests of young people at a time of violence and war, the rise of a rampant
anti-intellectualism, the emerging specter of authoritarianism, and the threat
of nuclear and ecological devastation? What might it mean to define the
university as a public good and democratic public sphere rather than as an
institution that has aligned itself with market values and is more attentive to
market fluctuations and investors than educating students to be critically
engaged citizens? Or, as Zygmunt Bauman and Leonidas Donskis write: ‘how will
we form the next generation of … intellectuals and politicians if young people
will never have an opportunity to experience what a non-vulgar, non-pragmatic,
non-instrumentalized university is like.[iv]
“As public spheres – once enlivened by
broad engagements with common concerns – are being transformed into ‘spectacular
spaces of consumption’,[v]
financial looting, the flight from mutual obligations and social
responsibilities has intensified and resulted in not only a devaluing of public
life and the common good, but also a crisis in the radical imagination,
especially in terms of the meaning and value of politics itself.[vi]
“What I am suggesting
is that the crisis of higher education is about much more than a crisis of
funding, an assault on dissent, and a remaking of higher education as another
institution designed to serve the increasing financialization of neoliberal
driven societies; it is also about a crisis of memory, agency, and the
political. As major newspapers all over the country shut down and the media
becomes more concentrated in the hands of fewer mega corporations, higher
education becomes one of the few sites left where the ideas, attitudes, values,
and goals can be taught that enable students to question authority, rethink the
nature of their relationship with others in terms of democratic rather than
commercial values, and take seriously the impending challenges of developing a
global democracy.
“The apostles of
predatory capitalism are well aware that no democracy can survive without an
informed citizenry, and they implement a range of policies to make sure that
higher education will no longer fulfill such a noble civic task. This is
evident in the business models imposed on governing structures, defining
students as customers, reducing faculty to Wal-Mart workers, imposing punishing
accounting models on educators, and expanding the ranks of the managerial class
at the expense of the power of faculty.
“As politics is removed from its
political, moral, and ethical registers – stripped down to a machine of social
and political death for whom the cultivation of the imagination is a hindrance,
commerce is the heartbeat of social relations, and the only mode of governance
that matters is one that rules Wall Street. Time and space have been privatized,
commodified, and stripped of human compassion under the reign of neoliberalism.
We live in the age of a new brutalism marked not simply by an indifference to
multiple social problems, but also defined by a kind of mad delight in the
spectacle and exercise of violence and what the famed film director, Ken Loach,
has called 'conscious cruelty.'[vii]
“America is marked by a brutalism that
is perfectly consistent with a new kind of barbaric power, one that puts
millions of people in prison, subjects an entire generation to a form of
indentured citizenship, and strips people of the material and symbolic
resources they need to exercise their capacity to live with dignity and
justice.
“For those of us who believe that
education is more than an extension of the business world and the new
brutalism, it is crucial that educators, artists, workers, labour unions, and
other cultural workers address a number of issues that connect the university
to the larger society while stressing the educative nature of politics as part
of a broader effort to create a critical culture, institutions, and a
collective movement that supports the connection between critique and action
and redefines agency in the service of the practice of freedom and justice. Let
me mention just a few…”
Works Cited:
[iv] Zygmunt Bauman and Leonidas Donskis, Moral Blindness:
The Loss of Sensitivity in Liquid Modernity, (Cambridge, UK: Polity Press,
2013), p. 139.
[vii] Fran Blandy, “Loach film on shame of poverty in
Britain moves Cannes to tears,” Yahoo News, May 13,
2016.
Henry A. Giroux is University
Professor for Scholarship in the Public Interest at McMaster University in
Hamilton, Ontario. His many books include Theory and Resistance in
Education (1983), Critical Theory and Educational Practice (1983), Teachers
as Intellectuals: Toward a Critical Pedagogy of Learning (1988), Border
Crossings: Cultural Workers and the Politics of Education (1992), Living
Dangerously: Multiculturalism and the Politics of Culture (1993), Pedagogy
and the Politics of Hope Theory, Culture, and Schooling (1997), Impure
Acts: The Practical Politics of Cultural Studies (2000), Public
Spaces/Private Lives: Democracy Beyond 9/11 (2003), Take Back Higher
Education: Race, Youth, and the Crisis of Democracy in the Post Civil Rights
Era (co-authored with Susan Searls Giroux, 2004), The Terror of
Neoliberalism: Authoritarianism and the Eclipse of Democracy (2004), The
University in Chains: Confronting the Military-Industrial-Academic Complex
(2007), Youth in a Suspect Society: Democracy or Disposability? (2009), America’s
Education Deficit and the War on Youth (2013), and America’s
Addiction to Terrorism (2016).
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.