The Department of “While Rome Burns”

There’s quite a lot of discussion about crisis in my book, both in terms of the two historical crises (the Great Depression and World War II) that had such a profound effect on the teaching of English, and in terms of the contemporary crisis, which I argue is less about pedagogy than it is about institutional power. Academics have allowed others to control our professional lives.

There’s not a fundamental crisis in funding, or in the market for English majors, or the use of part time labor, or the rising costs of tuition. (See this “Redesigning Today’s Graduate Classroom” for a recent example of these misconceptions.) The crisis is symptomatic of working people in academia who no longer believe in the power of organizing together towards collective goals.

The attacks on unions in Wisconsin should be instructive to academics. The budget crisis wasn’t caused by the unions, and it won’t be solved by breaking their power. The attacks on the unions is about trying to shift power away from democratic control so that money and capital can be moved out of the public sphere and into private hands. It’s simply a redistribution of wealth.

Markets are not natural phenomena; they are shaped by more or less explicit policy decisions. We can’t reshape the market for liberal arts graduate students simply by teaching them differently. We have to seize control of the mechanisms of policy and create a market that suits our goals. The only way to do that is to organized ourselves into unions. Right now, the rest is fiddling.

Oh What A Tangled Web We Weave…

Rahm Emanuel, mayor elect of Chicago, famously said ““You never want a serious crisis to go to waste.” Conservatives made a lot of silly hay out of this (this one claimed that the economy would probably “recover on its own”) but Emanuel was, as usual, simply being ironic and blunt about political reality. In particular, he meant that the financial crisis allowed the administration to introduce regulations– and stimulus money– that it could not do otherwise.

I don’t think the Obama administration has gone far enough with financial regulations, or stimulus, but the point remains: we hate regulations until the economy collapses, and then we bemoan their absence like a long lost lover. The politically unfeasible is now politically necessary. That’s what the Republicans believe justify their ongoing attacks on workplace democracy, including legislation in Ohio that specifically targets faculty unions. It’s Big Lie rhetoric.

In fact, polls show that the public disagrees with the attacks on collective bargaining. Perhaps as a result, the governor of Wisconsin seems poised to negotiate the very compromise that he said he would never accept. The real crisis, I think, which I hope the unions in particular will take advantage of, is the sense of powerlessness that a majority of Americans feel, as their standard– and quality– of living continues to erode. It’s not just jobs.

It’s a long term structural problem created by more than three decades of income redistribution from the poor, working and middle classes, to the rich. The attempt to destroy the public sector unions– the last bastion of real power for working people– has been the final straw for many people. We cannot fix the budget problems unless we begin to revitalize democracy via card check reform and address the taxation inequities that have created the mess.

Nixon’s Revenge

When we were kids in Texas, and we went to Mexico and ate something that we should not have eaten, we called the resulting diarrhea Montezuma’s revenge (people still do, of course). It has that authentic American racist feel to it, and it’s more than a little unfair to complain so cavalierly about a problem like dysentery, which is one of the scourges of poverty everywhere. Yet is also has a pointed irony, as if we recognized a kind of karma in genocide and colonialism.

The ongoing budget battles in the U.S., summarized in “State Lawmakers Seek More Say Over Colleges,” aren’t genocide, of course, but they do represent a kind of unfortunate political karma. Let’s call it Nixon’s revenge. Somehow– that somehow suggests an as yet undecipherable history– a portion of the U.S. electorate has become convinced that the only way to balance budgets is to make cuts. Since we spend so much on education, that means we have to cut there.

Yet if by “we” we mean the American people as represented by polls, then “we” don’t want these cuts. Arguably, they are in fact unnecessary, even in the most practical sense. If the “we” is the “we” that voted for the far right, though, then that “we” has given our body politic a bad case of political dysentery. Literally, a long dialog about nothing; discursive excrement. It’s Nixon’s revenge against the now grown up college kids who hated him so much.

We are being sold a bill of goods about education, to use the cliche, and we are buying it, in the same way that we were sold a bill of goods in Nixon’s “moral majority.” Or, in fact, in the same way that we have been sold things like the “pet rock.” I also don’t think it is historically inaccurate to say that only the much too tenuous power of people organized in unions is going to prevent some sort of final right wing solution to the “problem” of education.

Euphemism

In the last several weeks the demonetization of teachers has reached a fever pitch. In fact, the long-standing conservative attack on the government in general and on public schools and public school teachers in particular, seems to be broadening out to include firefighters, nurses, social workers, prison guards… If you work for the government, and you believe that you have the right to collectively bargain, your salary, pension, and working conditions are all up for grabs. The U.S. middle class has apparently agreed to its own destruction.

It’s a remarkable reversal. The people who exemplify the democratic ideals of public service have become the targets of a right-wing nihilism that believes that destroying the public commons will allow market forces to create utopia. One of the great tricks of this nihilism is the use of euphemism. It’s as if at some level conservatives realized that if they explained their real intentions they would be chased out of the room. You can’t tell people that you want to find a way to institutionalize low wages; instead, you push the “right to work” law.

You can’t tell people that you find the democratic process cumbersome and irritating; you have to say that you want “flexibility.” You don’t want to talk about the need to address poverty, so you talk about the “failure of public schools” and “bad teachers that cannot be fired.” And, most importantly, you can’t tell people that you want to create a more rigid, easily measurable education system, simply becuase that’s cheaper, and, again, becuase democracy and education is hard to measure or predict. You talk about accountability.