Henry Giroux: “All education is a struggle over what kind of future you want for young people"

Summary

The transcript critiques conventional pedagogies as suppressive, arguing for education's role in fostering critical consciousness and cultural production. It challenges the notion of neutral education as a political stance that obscures ideological influences. The speaker advocates for a critical pedagogy that equips students to engage with technology responsibly, recognizing its potential for both repression and empowerment. The discussion also addresses the intersection of capitalism, democracy, and education, emphasizing the need for economic rights in a true democracy and the importance of education in shaping societal narratives and future possibilities.

Takeaways

• 📚 Education's dual role: It empowers and limits, often suppressing imagination and adjusting individuals to limited agency.
• 🏫 'Teaching to the test': Pedagogies focused on testing and accountability neglect students' experiences and critical thinking.
• 🤔 Critical consciousness: Education should foster critical thinking and awareness of one's cultural capital and place in the world.
• 🔍 Questioning education's purpose: The debate should address 'what is education for?' rather than just teaching methods.
• 🌟 Producing agency: Education's goal is to create agency and narratives that broaden students' perspectives.
• 🚫 Methods over meaning: Starting with methods ignores fundamental questions about education's role in shaping ideology and culture.
• 🚫 The myth of neutrality: Claims of education's neutrality are political, hiding its role in shaping knowledge and power structures.
• 🌐 Technology's double-edged sword: New technologies offer opportunities for expression but are also tools for surveillance and control.
• 💡 Democracy and capitalism: Democracy requires economic rights and cannot coexist with capitalism's focus on profit accumulation.
• 🌱 The potential of youth: Young people possess significant power to enact change and should recognize their role in societal transformation.

Q & A

What is the speaker's view on the impact of education on imagination?

The speaker suggests that education can sometimes stifle imagination by teaching students to conform to conditions where their sense of agency is limited.

What does the speaker criticize about 'teaching to the test' pedagogies?

The speaker criticizes 'teaching to the test' pedagogies for not considering students' experiences or addressing important social issues, and for undermining the development of critical thinking.

Why does the speaker refer to certain educational methods as 'pedagogies of repression'?

The speaker calls certain methods 'pedagogies of repression' because they are designed to limit students' potential for critical thinking and awareness of their cultural capital.

What fundamental question does the speaker believe is ignored in current educational debates?

The speaker believes that the fundamental question 'what is education for?' is ignored in current educational debates, which focus too much on methods.

What does the speaker argue is the ultimate goal of education?

The speaker argues that the ultimate goal of education is the production of agency, shaping the narratives and perspectives that students have on the world and their place in it.

Why does the speaker consider the notion of educational neutrality a political issue?

The speaker views the notion of educational neutrality as a political issue because it hides the ideological and power dynamics at play in education, serving as a form of propaganda for dominant powers.

What role does the speaker believe technology plays in education and society?

The speaker sees technology as a tool with potential for both repression and empowerment in education and society, depending on the values and powers that govern its use.

How does the speaker view the relationship between capitalism and democracy?

The speaker asserts that capitalism and democracy are not the same, with capitalism being the antithesis of democracy because it focuses on accumulated profits rather than shared justice and power.

What does the speaker suggest is necessary for a true democracy?

The speaker suggests that a true democracy requires informed citizens, economic rights, and a focus on education as central to any discourse about democracy.

What does the speaker encourage young people to do in the face of societal challenges?

The speaker encourages young people to recognize their power as a political force, to engage in critique and possibility, and to act towards imagining and creating a different future.

Outlines

00:00

📚 The Paradox of Education: Empowerment and Repression

The first paragraph delves into the dual nature of education as both an empowering and repressive force. It critiques the current educational models that focus on standardized testing and accountability, which can stifle creativity and critical thinking. The speaker argues that these pedagogies often ignore the experiences and social issues relevant to students, instead conditioning them to accept limited agency. The debate on educational methods is presented as misguided, as it sidesteps the fundamental questions of educational purpose and the struggle for identity and agency. Education is ultimately about producing agency, and the speaker calls for a focus on the ideological, cultural, and political dimensions that shape education's role in society.

05:01

🌐 Technology and Democracy: The Struggle for Cultural Politics

The second paragraph shifts the focus to the role of technology in society, particularly in the context of cultural politics and democracy. The speaker discusses how technology, while initially seen as a democratizing force, has been co-opted by capitalist and neoliberal interests, leading to surveillance and repression. Selfies are used as an example of how technology can be both a mirror of neoliberalism and a tool for representation and dignity, especially for marginalized groups. The paragraph emphasizes the importance of understanding technology within the societal values and power structures that govern its use. The speaker also addresses the misconception that capitalism and democracy are synonymous, asserting that true democracy requires a focus on economic rights and a commitment to shared justice and power.

Keywords

💡Imagination

Imagination refers to the ability to form mental images or concepts of external objects, ideas, or situations not present to the senses. In the video, the speaker argues that some forms of education can stifle imagination by focusing on standardized tests and conformity, which can limit students' creativity and critical thinking. The speaker suggests that a truly empowering education should foster, not kill, the imagination.

💡Agency

Agency in this context is the capacity of individuals to act independently and make their own free choices. The speaker discusses how certain pedagogies can limit students' sense of agency by not allowing them to engage with their own experiences or critically analyze their social environment. The video emphasizes the importance of education in producing agency, enabling students to understand their place in the world and to act upon it.

💡Pedagogies of repression

Pedagogies of repression are educational methods that suppress critical thinking and self-awareness. The term is used in the video to criticize teaching approaches that prioritize test scores and standardized outcomes over the development of students' critical consciousness. Such pedagogies are seen as tools that maintain the status quo by not encouraging students to question or challenge existing social structures.

💡Cultural capital

Cultural capital refers to the cultural knowledge, skills, and experiences that an individual possesses, which can provide social and economic advantages. The video discusses how education should help students become aware of their cultural capital and its strengths, allowing them to understand their position in society and leverage it for personal and social advancement.

💡Critical consciousness

Critical consciousness is the awareness of social and political contradictions and the ability to act upon that awareness. The speaker in the video advocates for education that cultivates critical consciousness, enabling students to be not just critics but also cultural producers who can challenge and transform oppressive social structures.

💡Neutrality

In the context of the video, neutrality in education is criticized as a facade that hides the ideological underpinnings and power dynamics within educational systems. The speaker argues that claiming education is neutral is a political stance that obscures the ways in which education can perpetuate dominant ideologies and power structures.

💡Conscientization

Conscientization is the process of becoming critically aware of one's social, political, and economic circumstances and the mechanisms that maintain them. The video speaks to the importance of education in fostering conscientization, empowering individuals to recognize and challenge oppressive conditions and work towards social change.

💡Technological tools

Technological tools are the various digital and media resources that can be used for communication, learning, and cultural production. The video discusses how new technologies offer opportunities for young people to engage outside traditional media spheres but also warns of their potential for surveillance and repression, emphasizing the need to critically evaluate technology within societal values.

💡Neoliberalism

Neoliberalism is an economic and political philosophy that advocates for free market practices, deregulation, and reduced government intervention. In the video, the speaker critiques how neoliberalism has influenced education and technology, leading to a focus on individualism and market values at the expense of social justice and collective well-being.

💡Democracy

Democracy, as discussed in the video, is a system of government where power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or through elected representatives. The speaker argues for a more comprehensive understanding of democracy that includes not just political rights but also economic rights, and stresses the importance of education in fostering informed citizenship essential for a functioning democracy.

💡Capitalism

Capitalism is an economic system based on private ownership of the means of production and the pursuit of profit. The video contrasts capitalism with democracy, suggesting that capitalism's focus on profit accumulation is at odds with the principles of shared power and justice that are fundamental to a true democracy.

Highlights

Education can limit agency and imagination by focusing on test scores and accountability.

Pedagogies that ignore student experiences and social issues can undermine critical thinking.

Education should be about producing agency and narratives that enlarge perspectives.

The debate on education methods often ignores the fundamental questions of education's purpose.

Education is an introduction to the future and a struggle over the subjectivities that will shape it.

The notion of neutrality in education is a political issue that hides its ideological role.

Education cannot be neutral; it always serves certain ideologies and power structures.

Critical pedagogy is about developing critical consciousness and cultural production, not just skills.

New technologies offer opportunities for cultural production outside traditional media spheres.

Technologies like Google and Facebook have become tools of surveillance and repression.

Technology should be judged by the values and powers that drive its use in society.

Selfies can be a form of neoliberalism but also a tool for dignified representation.

Democracy and capitalism are not synonymous; capitalism focuses on profit accumulation, not shared justice.

A true democracy must include discussions on economic rights alongside political and personal liberties.

The current state of democracy is failing as it is being undermined by neoliberalism and capitalism.

Education must be central to discussions on democracy, but it is often overlooked.

Uncertainties can be a time for rethinking politics, struggle, and solidarity.

Power is not only about domination but also about resistance, especially for young people.

A discourse of possibility is needed to imagine a future different from the present.

Transcripts

Education is not just about empowering people

or practicing freedom.

It's also, in some ways, about killing the imagination

and educating people to adjust to conditions in which

their own sense of agency is basically limited. For instance,

we often see pedagogies that "teach to the test",

we often see pedagogies that are simply about accountability,

objective standards,

pedagogies that in no way take into consideration

the experience of students, or speak to important social issues.

They are pedagogies that, in many ways, are designed

to undercut the possibility for students to be critical thinkers,

critically conscious, aware of their own cultural capital

and its strengths, and their place in the world.

And I think it's rightly so

to call them "pedagogies of repression".

The debate about education today, with its emphasis on methods,

represents a new kind of pedagogical stupidity.

It completely ignores the most fundamental question

of education, "what is education for?",

and the most fundamental struggle in education:

a struggle of our identities, a struggle of our agency.

Education, in the final analysis, is about the production of agency.

What kind of agency and narratives are we going to produce

that students can understand, that enlarge their perspective

on the world, on their relationship to others and themselves?

Methods? To begin with methods

is to completely ignore, probably, all the most fundamental questions

about education: ideology, culture,

power, authority... How are these things constituted?

What's the basis for knowledge? On whose authority?

Does it speak to a particular kind of future?

Because all education is an introduction to the future.

It's a struggle over the future you want for young people,

over the subjectivities that will make that future possible,

over notions of narrative

that students can relate to and understand,

so they can see education as fundamental to who they are.

"Methods" doesn't do that. Methods contain a kind of silence

on the side of the worst forms of repression,

because they deny the very notion that students are alive.

They can be alive to themselves, to particular forms of knowledge,

particular social experiences and particular values.

The notion of neutrality, and when it's raised in education,

is the worst form of politics.

In itself, it's a political issue, a political question,

because it's taking a value around education

in ways to hide what education is really about.

I've always viewed that position

as the basis for a kind of fascist politics,

because it hides its code, for not allowing people

to understand the role that education plays ideologically,

the role it plays in producing particular forms of knowledge,

forms of power, kinds of social values,

notions of agency, narratives about the world...

It's impossible for education to be neutral. There's no such thing.

Those who argue that education should be neutral

are really arguing for a version of education

in which nobody is accountable, in which the people who produce

that form of education disappear, because they're saying it's neutral.

And so you can't identify the ideological processes, politics,

motive, power... That's precisely what they want.

I mean, look: power, at its worst,

is invisible. It makes itself invisible.

And that the notion that education is neutral

is, to me, one way of people who have dominant power

making it invisible and making propaganda of itself

incapable of being seen.

It seems to me that at the heart of critical pedagogy

is that... it's not a skill. We're not talking about skills.

We're talking about critical consciousness.

You know, conscientization.

We're talking about creating tools with which people can be

not only critics, but also cultural producers.

What new technology offers, particularly for young people,

is the opportunity to operate outside the traditional spheres of the media,

particularly mainstream media,

like they've never had that opportunity before.

At the same time, we also see the way in which the new technologies

have become enormously weaponized to repress people:

Google, Facebook...

These are, increasingly, technologies of surveillance.

That's what they are.

But there are enormous possibilities for them to be used.

We've seen them used in progressive and radical ways.

My theory about those technologies

is that we have to judge them

within the societies that are using them

according to very specific values.

It's not that the technology alone produces very specific relationships.

They operate according to the values that align with certain powers

to put into play how those things would be used.

Selfies! Selfies are the mirror or neoliberalism, right?

But they don't have to be...

Disabled people can project modes of representation

that dignify who they are. It's a struggle. These technologies

are part of a larger struggle over cultural politics.

In the beginning, when these technologies emerged,

there was a kind of romanticization about them.

"This is the new democracy!".

They divorced those technologies from questions of power,

and the concentration of power, and how it can absorb anything

in a capitalist society, particularly in a neoliberal society.

I think that has to be challenged.

With what we're seeing now, you'd have to be pretty stupid

to believe that Google is, somehow, on the side of democracy,

or to believe that Microsoft really cares about social justice,

or to believe that, in some way, Twitter is a new form of literacy.

Look, capitalism and democracy are not the same thing.

Let's begin there.

You can't talk about democracy if you're talking about capitalism.

Capitalism is the antithesis of democracy.

Capitalism doesn't believe in shared justice, shared power,

shared responsibilities. It believes in accumulated profits.

That's very different, right?

It seems to me that a debate over democracy,

particularly in terms of linking three things, political rights,

personal liberties and economic rights...

There's no democracy that won't talk about economic rights.

It doesn't exist.

You can have a range of personal and political individual freedoms,

I'm delighted with freedom of the press,

and with the ability to go and choose any religion I want,

but not with the notion that anybody

can either sleep at the Ritz or sleep under a bridge.

Sorry, doesn't work that way.

No democracy is worthy of the name.

I don't think any of them are finally finished or completed.

What democracy is, and what I like about it,

is the fact that it represents an ideal

in which no society is ever enough.

The concept, at its best, means it's unfinished.

It's never fully completed.

You always have to work at it. It's always a site of struggle.

Gramsci uses the term "interregnum".

He says it's a period when the old order is dying

and new societies are emerging,

and in the middle is that moment of restlessness,

that moment of uncertainty. That moment, today,

is increasingly dominated by a fascist politics.

It's dominated by right-wing groups, hate groups,

by people who hate immigrants, who hate refugees,

it's dominated by neo-Nazis, by white nationalists,

and we need to be aware that the language of democracy

has been undermined by neoliberalism,

by the hedge fund apparatus, by the capitalists,

and we haven't been able to recover.

Now we talk about "illiberal democracy".

In Hungary, in Poland... We say things like:

"Democracy means you have security, but you don't have freedom".

You have to give up freedom for security. Can you imagine?

That's the degree to which democracy has failed.

You can't have a democracy without informed citizens.

That's why education has to be at the centre

of any discourse about democracy, and it isn't.

That's where the left has failed.

It has failed to run education. They failed because they believe

that the most important structures of domination are entirely economic,

and not only those elements that trade in beliefs, in persuasion,

in pedagogy, in changing consciousness,

and motive identification.

Uncertainties can be a time of great anxiety,

and a time of great possibility,

a time to rethink the language of politics,

to rethink the language of struggle, to rethink the language of solidarity.

Power is not always about domination. Not exclusively.

It's also about resistance. Young people have a lot of power.

They can shut societies down. They can block streets,

engage in direct action, educate their parents.

They're a potent political force. What they need to do

is to recognise themselves as such, and I think they need to act,

because I think that a discourse of anxiety

should give way to a discourse of critique,

and a discourse of critique should give way

to a discourse of possibility, and a discourse of possibility means

that you can imagine a future very different from the present.