Why the Right Hates Teachers

I was reading yet another piece about Republican efforts to demonize college professors– in this case, by targeting Labor Studies professors– and thinking about why the right-wing hates teachers so much (“Groups Investigating E-Mails of Professors in Michigan and Wisconsin Produce No Evidence of Wrongdoing“). Luckily, this particular witch hunt has so far failed to find anything that might be used to drum up the sorts of fear and anger that have made the right-wing so effective in recent years.

At one level, this is very straightforward hardball politics, similar to the ongoing efforts to restrict voter registration. If  you can demonize government officials, you can by extension make it easier to destroy the last real bastion of organized labor. If you can destroy or undermine organized labor, you can undermine the democratic party and so retard social progress. Social progress, of course, is anathema to the right because it by definition shifts wealth away from the rich and powerful and to the rest of us.

It’s also a part of the right’s embrace of anti-intellectualism, which it confuses (perhaps deliberately) with populism. You can’t believe in global warming, or evolution because that would suggest support for the people “behind” these things, the intellectuals, that is, the scientists and teachers who develop and teach these ideas. That would mean support for the public schools and that would mean support for the public school unions.  All of that reduces profits. It’s a Matryoshka doll of nested craziness.

 

Coming in from the Cold

The  ongoing consolidation of the online higher education system, especially in the for-profit sector, is one of the most important developments in the last twenty years.  Yet, like the emergence of the internet in the early to mid 1990’s, it remains almost completely invisible in the mainstream– I am tempted to say lamestream— media.  I think it’s under-reported even in the education media.

There’s a lot to be concerned about the emerging online system– arguably, the most transformative development of the internet so far– yet the emergence of the new institutions seems to be happening without much public discussion, much less scrutiny.  The discussion that is going on, such as in Inside Higher Ed (“Going Off on Online Rankings“) seems so lost in the trees that it never considers the forest.

The U.S. News and World Report’s rankings of online schools are significant because they signal the first stages in the maturation of the online industry, led by for-profits, but increasingly joined by public schools. The final shape of the system– it’s ratio of for and not for profit institutions– has yet to be determined, mostly because the online system so radically widens the pool of potential students.

We need answers or at least a debate. Will the new system make life-long learning a practical reality? It’s not a part of  the Republican or Democrat deadbeats’ agendas, but ironically that absence  may signal its significance.  Just as importantly, is this emerging system going to reproduce the traditional system’s exploitative labor policies,  massive debt, and alienating mass consumption?

Hidden in Plain Sight

It’s a bleak Labor Day in every sense. The economy’s in a mess, and our so-called Democratic president has prepared us for his big speech on jobs–  no doubt it’ll be a catalog of concessions to capital– by abandoning updates to the EPA. More and more, Obama just seems like another in a long line of liberal cowards too ready to believe the ever-present whining of the rich. “No we can’t!” “No we can’t!”

Of course they can.  Obama chose to ignore all the wealth squirreled away, and the potential for green technology to jump-start the economy, and the (obvious) popularity of investing in clean water and air and better health and preventing disease. I think that future historians (are you listening?) should name our particular slice of time, the “hidden in plain sight” era.

As Robert Reich has pointed out, we know what the economy needs, from historical evidence– what we did the last time there was an economic crisis of this size– and from contemporary evidence, particularly from Germany (“Why Inequality is the Real Cause of Our Ongoing Terrible Economy“). He sums up the evidence here:

Germany has grown faster than the United States for the last 15 years, and the gains have been more widely spread. While Americans’ average hourly pay has risen only 6 percent since 1985, adjusted for inflation, German workers’ pay has risen almost 30 percent. At the same time, the top 1 percent of German households now take home about 11 percent of all income — about the same as in 1970. And although in the last months Germany has been hit by the debt crisis of its neighbors, its unemployment is still below where it was when the financial crisis started in 2007.

How has Germany done it? Mainly by focusing like a laser on education (German math scores continue to extend their lead over American), and by maintaining strong labor unions.

There’s no real mystery. Too many people in the U.S. were sold a bill of goods and came to believe that the very institutions necessary to maintaining a healthy economy and preventing disaster– measures that ought to be the basis of fiscal conservatism— had to be dismantled or rendered powerless. Roads, bridges, unions, schools: nothing’s worth the investment, government is the problem.

It’s not hard to imagine why a capitalist system resists anything that might restrict profits.  It’s basic premise is greed. It is much harder to imagine why anyone who’s not rich would buy into the idea of unrestricted profits and power.  History shows that dismantling labor unions is not much different from giving someone permission to withdraw as much as they like from your bank account.

Maybe that’s too abstract, somehow. Despite all evidence to the contrary, Americans like to believe that they can achieve whatever they like individually despite or perhaps because of  their collective powerlessness.  That’s the essence of right-wing libertarianism and the Tea Party (and the status system in academia) . That’s not economics, that’s Mad Max. Yet there’s also very concrete evidence too.

Americans are nothing if not sentimental about children, so you would think that anything that hurts their kids would cause an uprising.  Yet according to data gathered by the New York Federal Reserve (“Chart of the Day: Student Loans Have Grown 511% Since 1999“) student debt rose by more than 500% during the Bush presidency.  It’s hidden in plain sight; so is one good solution.

Zombies Walk the Earth

I read a piece this morning about the U.S. public education system (“How to Do the Right Thing in a System That is Wrong?”) that compares teachers’ positions in today’s system to the citizens under the regimes of the former Soviet Union.  Setting aside the hyperbole (so far, we don’t have an educational secret police) the author’s rallying call makes a lot of sense: “Do the right thing, America. Protest. Stand up and stand against your state’s annual orgy of standardized testing.”

What’s so striking about this piece is its timidity and its apparent ignorance of history.  The writer, Marion Brady, seems to assume that the defeat of organized resistance is complete, and that “citizen groups… petitions… speeches… books, articles, op-eds, and letters to editors” are the only legitimate forms of collective resistance. That’s not true. The first line of resistance for teachers has to be their unions. Those communist regimes weren’t defeated by letters to the editor.

It’s important to remember that the successful fight against the Soviet System began with the solidarity movement in Poland. It’s not workers protesting alone, although the risk to individuals was great, it’s large numbers of workers working together towards a common goal.  At one time,  here in the U.S., we understood the power of collective struggle and work; it’s how we built the modern world. We have to fight the amnesia that tries to fool us into a self-defeating individualism.