To cut a long story short: Yes. But what does that mean, how does it affect us, and what can we do to change it? Read on to find out.

Side note: No, I didn't forget to capitalise bell hooks' name! Bell hooks is the pen name of the scholar Gloria Jean Watkins, who chose to leave it uncapitalised so as not to divert importance or attention away from her writing.

The politics of education: Fuelling the capitalist system

According to the educationalist Paulo Freire, “as educators we are politicians; we engage in politics when we educate” (1998, p. 68). But what does it mean to engage in politics? Far from the goings-on within the Beehive, the politics of the classroom appear to be more subtle, yet they are just as powerful. The nature of these politics correlates with the purpose of the education being given, which in turn affects what is taught and how it is taught. Particularly in the current context of capitalism, power and surveillance play a large part in reinforcing the system.

What are some potential aims of education, and how do they correlate with political aims? While we may like to think that education is all about gaining knowledge, fostering curiosity and building relationships, a more pessimistic view would focus on aims like measurement, discipline and employability. Such aims fit within a capitalist (or neoliberal) system, one in which students are “trained to enrich the system, not themselves” (DeFalco, 2016, p. 58, as cited in Pérez-Ibáñez, 2018, p. 20). This Deweyan argument laments that students are unable to “reflect on and criticize the content and belief system that they are being taught”, and thus are forced to submit themselves to the system (Pérez-Ibáñez, 2018, p. 20).

The banking education model stands out as the ideal way of achieving these capitalist purposes, as its passive and impersonal nature makes it easy to replicate and scale up. It is referred to as the banking model because the learning process is like a transaction from the all-knowing teacher to the empty mind of the students. Knowledge is absorbed, regurgitated for the purpose of assessment, and then likely to be promptly forgotten to make room for the next topic. Freire describes this as a situation where “the teacher teaches and the students are taught”, which is the exact opposite of the reciprocal ako relationship (1996, p. 54).

Freire evokes the concept of ako with his liberating education model. In this model, “the teacher is no longer merely the one who teaches, but one who is taught in dialogue with the students, who in turn while being taught also teach” (Freire, 1996, pp. 61-62). This model clearly rejects the capitalist politics which fuel the Deweyan version of education, but that does not mean that it is apolitical. In fact, liberating education could be seen as more political, as it encourages students to reflect, criticise and challenge (Giroux, 2010; Shor & Freire, 1987).

Another alternative education model is peace education. Peace education rejects today’s focus on cognitive learning, instead promoting learning which “focuses on feelings, the body and experiences, and nurtures interpersonal social skills and values” (Balasooriya, 2001, IFCR, 2011, as cited in Zoeppritz, 2016, p. 13). This goes against the capitalist push to bottle up our emotions and “get on with the job”. If our metaphorical bottle were to burst open and we were to lash out, the capitalist solution would be to simply remove us from the situation with little to no procedural or restorative justice offered; whereas with peace education, emotions are valued and conflict is addressed fairly and openly.

Bell hooks proposes yet another model, teaching to transgress. This model, similar to peace education, aims to see students and their aims and needs as diverse (hooks, 1994). Instead of typical models such as the banking model which encourage teachers to “enact rituals of control that [are] about domination and the unjust exercise of power”, hooks’ model emphasises the need to transgress the normative boundaries which keep us trapped within particular sets of knowledge and certain teacher-student dynamics (1994, p. 5). This transgression would compel teachers to consider intersectionality, to see students as individuals, and to provide them with an education which can be connected to their own experiences; through this, the teachers themselves will also become more empowered (hooks, 1994).

We touched upon the dynamics of power in the classroom, an aspect which merits further discussion. Modern educational policies have become fixated on measurement and comparison, sparking a chain reaction in the way that schools express their institutional power all the way down to how students are disciplined. Being able to easily identify, pluck out and discard students whose results and/or behaviours are undesirable (instead of addressing the root issues) enables schools to more efficiently churn out the type of students desired by the capitalist system: ones who conform and do not challenge. This task is made easier by the panopticon-like “organised discipline” employed by schools, where constant surveillance and regulation transform students into “self-disciplining ‘docile bodies’” who do not dare to deviate from the norm (Foucault, 1977, as cited in Monahan & Torres, 2009, p. 7).

These dynamics are influenced by the concept of biopower, which posits that schools as institutions wield “the right to ‘foster life or disallow it to the point of death’” (Foucault, 1978, p. 138, as cited in MacDonald & Gillis, 2017, p. 138). This may appear overdramatic, but if we consider the flow-on effects that being denied an education can potentially have – lack of career opportunities, poverty, incarceration – it is clear that these institutions have the ability to severely alter our life path. The concept of biopower lies in stark contrast to John Dewey’s belief that the role of schools should be “maintaining the life and advancing the welfare of society” (1903, p. 10). Through the lens of biopower, students are objectified according to their value to the economy, and the aim shifts from advancing the welfare of society to advancing the productivity of society.

A critique of the political nature of education would not be complete without mention of the colonial and racist influences behind what knowledge is taught and which students are deemed successful. In the current Aotearoa New Zealand context, these influences remain clear. Ranginui Walker writes of the “domination of chiefly mana by a foreign power … and the erosion of language, culture and self-respect” which Māori suffered at the beginning of the colonisation process (2017, p. 20). Our Eurocentric education system perpetuates these acts by belittling mātauranga Māori and reducing te ao Māori to tokenistic inclusions instead of forming a key (if not equal) part of the curriculum. Walker also brings up the colonial mission schools’ aim “to prepare Māori for a future as a labouring underclass” (2017, p. 23). This too lives on in the way that staff often nudge Māori towards trades and other “unskilled” jobs (Craven et al., 2005, as cited in Brown, 2019). The underachievement of Māori students seems to be a chronic problem, but what if we finally accepted that the problem is not these failing students and rather the system which is failing them? This revelation is unlikely to ever occur, as according to a capitalist mindset such failure is just the system working as planned, providing the economy with a steady stream of disenfranchised youth who feel they have no option but to take up the least desirable jobs.

The educational path that has been forged by capitalism is bleak, but we have the ability to diverge from it if we wish. Freire’s liberating education, peace education, and hooks’ teaching to transgress all offer tools for teachers and students to challenge the politics of education at the lower level. By questioning, connecting and transgressing, the classroom can transform into an empowering place. The real challenge will be changing the narrative at the institutional level, as the education system has been poisoned by concepts such as surveillance, biopower and colonialism. These concepts are inextricably linked to capitalism in the general sense, as they can be found in other settings including the workplace and the healthcare system. All such systems are political, hence political participation and representation are the key to change.

References