 |
 |
One thing that I think is missing from this (very interesting) discussion is a consideration of the changing nature of the global economy, the declining influence of the nation state and the exponential growth of a global corporate shadow state. If market discourse is creeping into every sphere of public (and private) life at this historical moment, this has everything to do with the growth of corporate power and the Milton Friedman Chicago School free market ideology espoused by the organic intellectuals of this powerful movement. We are living a time of extraordinary change; the deck of public discourse has been reshuffled and as the cards are being played the rules of the game itself are being changed. Some have asserted that we have always been subject to the requirements of the markets, that we owe are own well-being to the engines of economic growth. In fact, a historical overview of the consolidation of corporate power will bear out that (cultural, social, economic, etc.) "development" has often occured despite the wishes of big business, not because of them. We pay (public) taxes and (private) profits. Our taxes have paid the bills for educational institutions; the profits which WE HAVE PAID, have not. So why should we subject our public institutions to the dictates of those who have not paid the bills? BTW, many business organizations continue to recognize the value of liberal arts education. That is the good news for those of you in English departments. Now, with the whispers that Western may eliminate its Faculty of Education, the pressure is on 'professional' fields to tailor outputs to the needs of business (ie. too many unemployed teachers; funding teacher education is now a 'waste' of public funds - an Orwellian notion if there ever was one given that the free market ideology of the Harris govt. has put many of these folks on the dole). This is the bad news for those of us in education. One final point: in regards to the existence of private universities in the US, let's not forget that our distinct national institutional matrices arose in a different historical period. If private universities in the US are effective, sometimes even better than public ones, we cannot necesarily assume that the Canadian public system would benefit from privatization at this time (and under the tutelage of our current governors). Michael Hoechsmann OISE, Curriculum