191.
Psychopathic Programming: The Underground History of American Education by John
Taylor Gatto from archive.org
Psychopathic
Programming
I
could regale you with mountains of statistics to illustrate the damage schools
cause. I could bring before your
attention a line of case studies to illustrate the mutilation of specific individuals — even those who have
been apparently privileged as its "gifted and talented." 3 What would that prove?
You've heard those stories, read these figures before until you went numb from the assault on
common sense. School can't be that bad, you say. You survived, didn't you? Or did you?
Review what you learned there. Has it made a
crucial
difference for good in your life? Don't answer. I know it
hasn't. You surrendered twelve years of
your life because you had no choice. You paid your dues, I paid mine. But who collected those dues?
In
191 1, a prominent German sociologist, Robert Michel, warned in his book
Political Parties that the size and
prosperity of modern bureaucracies had given them unprecedented ability to buy friends. In this
way they shield themselves against internal
reform and make themselves impervious to outside reform. Across this
great epoch of bureaucracy, Michel's
warning has been strikingly borne out. Where school is concerned we have lived through six major periods of
crisis since its beginning, zones of social
turmoil where outsiders have demanded the state change the way it
provides for the schooling of children.
4 Each crisis can be used as a stepping stone leading us back to the original wrong path we took at the
beginnings.
All
alleged reforms have left schooling exactly in the shape they found it, except
bigger, richer, politically stronger.
And morally and intellectually worse by the standards of the common American village of yesteryear which
still lives in our hearts. Many people of
conscience only defend institutional schooling because they can't
imagine what would happen without any
schools, especially what might happen to the poor. This compassionate and articulate contingent has
consistently been fronted by the real
engineers of schooling, skillfully used as shock troops to support the
cumulative destruction of American
working-class and peasant culture, a destruction largely effected through schooling.
Psychopathic programming is incapable of
change. It lacks moral dimension or ethical
mind beyond the pragmatic. Institutional morality is always public
relations; once institutional machinery
of sufficient size and complexity is built, a logical movement commences that is internally aimed toward
subordination and eventual elimination of all
ethical mandates. Even if quality personnel are stationed on the
parapets in the first generation of new
institutional existence, that original vigilance will flag as pioneers
give way to time-servers. The only
reliable defense against this is to keep institutions weak and dispersed, even if that means sacrificing
efficiency and holding them on a very short
leash.
Michel wrote in Political Parties that the
primary mission of all institutional managers
(including school managers) is to cause their institution to grow in
power, in number of employees, in
autonomy from public oversight, and in rewards for key personnel. The primary mission is never, of course, the
publicly announced one. Whether we are talking
about bureaucracies assigned to wage war, deliver mail, or educate
children, there is no difference.
In the course of things, this
rationalization isn't a straight line matter. There can be pullbacks in the face of criticism, for
example. But examined over time, movement
toward rationalizing operations is always unidirectional, public outrage
against the immoral effects of this is
buffered by purchased political friendships, by seemingly neutral public authorities who always find it
prudent to argue for delay, in confidence the
heat will cool. In this way momentum is spent, public attention
diverted, until the next upwelling of
outrage. These strategies of opinion management are taught calmly through elite graduate university training in the
best schools here, as was true in Prussia.
Corporate bureaucracies, including those in the so-called public sphere,
know how to wear out critics. There is
no malicious intent, only a striving for efficiency.
Something has been happening in America since
the end of WWII, accelerating since the
flight of Sputnik and the invasion of Vietnam. A massive effort is
underway to link centrally organized
control of jobs with centrally organized administration of schooling. This would be an American equivalent of the
Chinese "Dangan" — linking a personal file begun in kindergarten (recording academic
performance, attitudes, behavioral
characteristics, medical records, and other personal data) with all work
opportunities. In China the Dangan can't
be escaped. It is part of a web of social controls that ensures stability of the social order; justice has
nothing to do with it. The Dangan is coming to the United States under cover of skillfully
engineered changes in medicine, employment,
education, social service, etc., seemingly remote from one another. In
fact, the pieces are being coordinated
through an interlink between foundations, grant-making government departments, corporate public relations, key
universities, and similar agencies out of
public view.
This American Dangan will begin with longer
school days and years, with more public
resources devoted to institutional schooling, with more job
opportunities in the school field, more
emphasis on standardized testing, more national examinations, plus
hitherto unheard of developments like
national teaching licenses, national curricula, national goals, national standards, and with the great
dream of corporate America since 1900,
School-to- Work legislation organizing the youth of America into
precocious work battalions. A Dangan by its
nature is always psychopathic. It buries its mistakes.
3
What I would never do is to argue that the damage to human potential is
adequately caught in the rise or fall
of SAT scores or any other standardized measure because these markers are too
unreliable — besides being far too prone to strategic manipulation. The New York Times of March 9,
2003, reported in an article by Sara Rimer that Harvard rejects four
valedictorians out of every five,
quoting that school's director of admissions as saying: "To get in
[Harvard], you have to present some real distinction..." A distinction which, apparently, 80 Percent of
"top" students lack.
4 Different addictive readers of school
histories might tally eight crises or five, so the stab at specificity shouldn't be taken too seriously by any
reader. What it is meant to indicate is that careful immersion in pedagogical
history will reveal, even to the most
skeptical, that mass schooling has been in nearly constant crisis since its
inception. There never was a golden age of mass schooling, nor can there ever be.
No comments:
Post a Comment