Drinking From the Poisoned Well

Professor J,

Happy New Year to you and to our readers. In recommending how our followers should treat their copy of Empire, you have described perfectly what mine looks like. :)

What, no platinum? I'll have to try harder. ;)


In referring to early twentieth-century capitalists Frank Donoghue has this to say: "(they) were motivated by an ethically based anti-intellectualism that transcended interest in the bottom line. Their distrust of the ideal of intellectual inquiry for its own sake led them to insist that if universities were to be preserved at all, they must operate on a different set of principles from those governing the liberal arts." (109-110)


Did you get that? Their "distrust of intellectual inquiry for its own sake...and with that they poisoned the educational well. And anyone who has been paying even scant attention in the last couple of election cycles, can see that it's contaminated politics to the point of embarrassment.


Let's talk about something else that is wrong. When we remove civil discourse and passionate and respectful debate from the public arena we deprive people of something. That something is interesting and stimulating conversation. We've given in to the despair of trivial exchanges and idle chit-chat. (I'm sure the Romans would recognize the Kardashians and all the meaningless conversation that revolves around them and other "celebrities") We've allowed important ideas  to become the exclusive property of policy wonks and media talking heads. We have taken the big important discussions, drained the life force out of them, embalmed them, and put them on a shelves labeled PROPERTY OF EXPERTS and BORING.  Lots of people have given up trying to understand the complex problems we face, let alone think of solutions.

Thinking about the future should be fun. Imagining creative solutions, dialogue, and collaboration should be interesting and engaging.  We aren't just depriving people of a real education but of the inspired belief that they could, even in some small way, be part of the solution. We don't just have income disparity and economic "haves" and "have nots". We have deep educational poverty and a deficit of fresh ideas. We are breeding hopelessness no matter how much we say we want "hope and change." It is at our peril that we exclude huge segments of the population from the national (or local, or communal) conversation about what is wrong and how to fix it. There is something interesting in what you say about your friend's discussion about OWS and I've encountered it myself. The discussion (and the need for it) is discounted as unimportant. Everyone wants to know whose "side" they are on or what party might put the anger to best use. We have a real need to be able to discuss what is wrong, and how the myriad of things that are wrong connect and contribute to urgency of our situation.

Sometimes there is a Frankenstein style jolt of energy that can momentarily bring the discussion to life but these are fleeting moments of anger and intolerance that prevent listening to the other side. It is the illusion of having given something any thought, disguised as a passionate stance, which is more than likely, not well thought out. Here's a quote from Take the Lead, by Betsy Myers:

"There's not enough civility today among people with different points of view, let alone camaraderie. We don't have to agree on everything, yet we  can still like and respect each other. We can say, "Hey, there's another point of view--okay, let me hear yours." And who knows? I've come full circle on a lot of things in my life.
  
Too many people start out with preconceived ideas, and they decide they don't like you before they know you. And that's dangerous. That's how you become a zealot. If you aren't willing to hear another point of view, how do you grow?"

Then yesterday I read this in That Used To Be Us:

General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff: "Collaboration is important on the battlefield and trust is the cement of collaboration. And trust is the prerequisite for creativity. You will never be creative if you think that what you have to say will be discounted. So creativity cannot happen without trust, communication cannot happen without trust, and collaboration cannot happen without trust. It is the essential driver." (p.91) We are missing so much...trust, collaboration, creativity, communication all of which we need in the worst way.

I have a FB "acquaintance" (Facebook finally figured out that it feels strange to call everyone you know "friend"). who routinely calls the president "Obozo" along with a variety of other creative and original terms like "idiot, moron", and "stupid." I've given up inquiring about specific POLICIES or DECISIONS that she might take issue with. Everything is vague, unsubstantiated or emotionally incendiary. I had a go to diplomatically explain the Occupy Wall Street protesters, but much like the friends you mention, she doesn't seem to value the fact that pointing out what is wrong and awakening others is an important first step in correcting course.

Here's a story about the sad state of education that happened in my city: One month into this school year, a young man attending one of the inner city schools was distressed about the fact that books had not been passed out. Getting no help from the administration, he sued the school system for failing to educate him, which got him a well publicized meeting with the school board. Miraculously, a few days later ALL of the books were discovered in a locked utility room. No one, it would seem, saw the importance of getting those books into the hands of students. What is equally disturbing is that in a school with thousands of students, ONE was concerned and had enough initiative to take on the adults running the system. I get a little weary listening to people criticize change with the argument that something new  might fail. THAT'S the reasoning? Better the devil you know...?

Change is possible. We already have a good example of how powerful refusing to cooperate is. Chris Gardner's quote that the cavalry isn't coming and we are going to have to do it ourselves, could be the slogan for the entire home school movement. It's an example that has already proven that individuals, families, and communities can bring about massive change on a small scale. State laws that were openly hostile twenty-five years ago, have been changed to make it easier. The number of people opting out of the system, have made it socially acceptable. When I started in the late 80s people use to ask: "Is that legal?" or "Can you DO that?" Educating the questioner was nearly as much a part of the mission as teaching a child to read. Passionate and persistent parents were rabid promoters of the idea that their children were not properties of the state. But instead would learn the importance of being excellent CITIZENS.

Eventually I noticed that people stopped asking if it was legal, then began saying that they knew a friend/family member/neighbor who was doing that. That was the tipping point. Now people tell me stories about the college student, or new employee who has a different attitude about learning and work than his peers. There use to be a need for a Home School Legal Defense Fund. These days the sheer numbers are the defense. At the time change seemed so excruciatingly S-L-O-W (the possibility of authorities showing up at your door has that effect) but looking back now, the change actually happened fairly rapidly.

Here's an important point about the success of the HS movement. The people doing it were DIVERSE. You had the ultra conservative mom in a dowdy dress who didn't want her kids taught evolution attending a conference on learning styles next to the Birkenstock wearing mom in her Grateful Dead t-shirt who didn't want her kid learning about American Imperialism. The space between these two extremes was filled with people who wanted the freedom to travel with their kids, not be confined by the school calendar, or give their gifted/special needs child the ability to learn at his own pace. They were doing something that I think is vital for finding practical workable solutions to our problems: Moving in the same direction, for different reasons. 

We often stall progress by demanding that everyone on "our side" shares the same ideology or claim we can't work with others who don't. Let's come up with inventive ways to fix what's wrong and let people engage in it for whatever reasons they want. You'll recall that I think this would work in a lot of areas including the thinking surrounding environmental issues.