Ruminations: Public Education, Privateers, and Purpose

 

In a previous post (see: Blogging Blue | A Glimpse at the Sickening Reality),  I addressed the nanny state and in so doing touched on the transection betwixt education and democracy. I emphasized the inextricable relationship between the two, the blanket purpose for education being the maintenance of the republic. The following day I came across this piece by Thom Hartmann making a similar, but more poignant determination on the matter: Republican Lies Thwart Attempts to Reach Democratic Ideal of Educated Citizenry

In the intervening period, however, I ruminated on the purpose of education and Thomas Jefferson’s nanny-stating curriculum (Classics, Humanities, and Science); John F. Kennedy’s national curriculum in response to the Cold War; and education rhetoric in response to the Knowledge Economy and 21st century globalization. 

Kennedy’s idea of education, that is, educating the whole person… the individual… corresponded exactly to Jefferson’s philosophy of developing the individual. One excellent example of consonance between Kennedy’s approach to education, the individual, and society and Jefferson’s can be found in Jefferson’s devotion to, and cultivation of, the arts – music in particular. So devoted was he, that while traveling he kept always on his person a pochette – a small violin designed to fit in the pocket – thereby allowing him to play during periods when his many instruments were inaccessible. Jefferson’s love of knowledge and creativity was completely integrated within his person and one might say that love never narrowed nor did it cease with his formal studies.

I have long maintained that narrowing the purpose of education to fit a narrowing economy in the Nixonian-NCLB-NeoLib mold serves only to develop ill-prepared cogs, not well-rounded people. I liken the NNN model to Alexander Pope’s Dulness in the Dunciad – turning geniuses into fools. I maintain that position, still, while recognizing that not all individuals will be enlightened administrators of government in the Jeffersonian ideal. At the same time, I can’t help but note the diversity in vocation made possible by Enlightenment (more specifically Scottish Enlightenment) education. Of course, context cannot be overstated with respect to vocation.

In the 18th century American context, the suggestion that independence, personal industry, and individual responsibility could prevail under a structurally dictatorial thumb like the contemporary “market” and “private sector” would have been met with abhorrence and as an utter abomination. The notion of “job creators” would haven been incomprehensible to the Constitution creators.

Whilst ruminating I came across another item, Ed Kilgore’s commentary on education and strata, which illuminates how regressive the NNN education model truly is: Political Animal – Are We On the Road Back to a Two-Tiered Higher Education System?

But another thought came to mind, and that was Ron Johnson’s recent response to the student debt crisis: More for-profit colleges! he cried. Not too startling a revelation given his Ayn Rand world view and his past defense for the sucking dry of public coffers (the taxpayer) by the for-profit-so-called-college industry  (Daily Kos: GOP Senators try to block stricter rules for for-profit colleges). And that reminded me of colonial Rhode Island; of John Brown, the Providence privateer and the politically intricate Brown family clan.

The Brown clan consisted of members of the entrepreneurial Brown family and their allied cabal who periodically dominated the RI legislature by employing illicit and Anti-democratical wheelings and dealings. Brothers John and Moses figured prominently in the widely diverse Brown family ventures including among other pursuits – candle making, shipping, distilling, whaling, iron manufacturing, smuggling, privateering, and slave trading…hardly an exhaustive list but you get the idea. Sadly, John and Moses prefigured the pitting of brother against brother which later marked the Civil War. Moses turned abolitionist. John did not. The ideological split bitterly rent their relationship. That’s just a side note, and an interesting story on its own. Of importance is that even amidst their caustic personal disputes John and Moses collaborated for the cause of common good.

Interestingly, John, the more ruthlessly entrepreneurial of the two, distinguished himself in the events preceding the American Revolution as a contingent member of the Sons of Liberty (hint: Boston Tea Party); he played no small part in nudging New England toward war with Old England when he led a piratical flotilla against the Gaspee, a British revenue cutter which, at the time of the assault, was helplessly beached on a sand bar in the shallows of Narragansett  Bay. Also of note was John’s support for repudiating the first tax authorized by America’s first Congress – as part of an anti-tax movement that nearly collapsed the new republic. Incidentally, John Brown’s machinations with the Continental Congress resulted in a series of war profiteering maneuvers which left American soldiers suffering in conditions that can be described as nothing less than unconscionable and inhumane. In short, he was a profit-monger of no small account; and he had no compunction toward belligerently even violently removing government obstacles to personal profit, be that government British or be that government American or be those obstacles continental army or patriot milita. It should come as no surprise that John Brown ranked among the wealthiest individuals in Rhode Island.

Yeah, so… what does any of this have to do with Ron Johnson? Well, to John Brown is where my mind wandered when mulling over Johnson’s stance on expanding for-profit colleges. But wait… just as I was scribbling out the final pieces of this crazy quilt of ruminations, another crumb of fool-whackery arrived on my desk (Jeb Bush’s Disdain for Public Education). Oh, the synergy, the kismet… makes the skin crawl… and the heart sing (to the Beverly Hillbillies theme song): Come listen to my story about a man named Jeb, a poor privateer who really kept his family fed, and then one day he was spoutin’ ‘bout the schools… proving he and his ilk, they ain’t nuthin’ more than fools. Clods, that is. Imbeciles and muttonheads….

I digress. Okay, for the ironical grand finale, or to re-coin a familiar phrase: Empowering the Taxpayer. Back to colonial Rhode Island, to John and Moses Brown. Around about the period just following the French and Indian War, Providence colonials undertook a rag-tag, privatizing effort to educate its children. These endeavors resulted in a smattering of private schools accessible only to the wealthiest of its residents – like, for instance, John and Moses Brown. One might presume the Browns would be satisfied by this situation, but, possessing the communitarian spirit which fueled the American Revolution, they were dissatisfied. Instead, the Brown brothers called for universal education, and embarked on a crusade for publicly funded schools to be established by levying a property tax.

Moses argued that burgeoning commerce necessitated a stable, guaranteed system for educating the children of Providence (this from the more philosophical, contemplative, of the Brown brothers). John (the ruthless, anti-tax, Tea-Partying, pirate-privateer) argued, “It would be a very easy matter to raise money by subscription from a very few persons to be proprietors to build a school house to their own private use…” Indeed, this was the status quo in Providence. And it worked… for a precious few. But, John Brown further argued that such an arrangement was not currently, and in the future, would not “be of service to hundreds there is in this town who is not able to build a house to school their children in.” Curious.

Even more curious, despite the Browns’ political clout (not inconsiderable at that), their program for universal education failed. The private schoolers, the “market-driven” proprietors launched a counter-campaign. These vilifiers adopted a rather clever strategy. Rather than pressuring local government to reject the plan, they targeted the common masses, ironically, the very Providence residents unable to partake in private, proprietary education. Years later, Moses Brown commented on the events saying, “What is most surprising and remarkable, the plan for a Free School, supported by a tax, was rejected by the poorer sort of people, being strangely led away not to see their own as well as the public interest therein.”

Most surprising. As surprising as say, the belief that siphoning public money into profit-driven training camps might adequately rival a universally accessible and intellectually rigorous university curriculum. Makes one ponder the revered ideal of equality, and what  equality might mean in this scenario. Equality of outcome? Heavens no. Perish the thought. Never would we want equality of outcome. Only equality of opportunity. Substandard, pocket-gouging, for-profit dolt mills empowering the taxpayer? Which might that be – equality of outcome or equality of opportunity?

As surprising as say, the insistence that freedom from ignorance and “choice” might bear some coherent resemblance to each other. That the gravity of a bovine commodity, and the permanent use of, something like – a weekly milk purchase – might logically correlate to something so insignificant and uncomplicated as something like – educating children to be critically thinking, responsible citizens capable of individual self-sufficiency and rational self-governance. Private/Parochial Vouchers empowering the taxpayer? Methinks the public interest best not engage in private folly like excessive speculation and risk. Methinks taxpayers are empowered best by public services wherein equality of opportunity will be secured.

Probably not surprising is my falling back on Jefferson (as I am wont to do) for the final word:

“If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and will never be.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share:

Related Articles